Accreditation Criteria Procedures 2013

The road to a P.ENG.
*
begins with the right education.
Le programme dtudes appropri
ouvre la voie l
ING.
*
Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board
Accreditation Criteria and Procedures
Bureau canadien dagrment des
programmes de gnie
Normes et procdures dagrment
Engineers Canada is the national organization of the 12 provincial and territorial associations
that regulate the practice of engineering and license the countrys more than 260,000 members
of the engineering profession. Established in 1936, Engineers Canada serves the associations,
which are its constituent and sole members, through the delivery of national programs which
ensure the highest standards of engineering education, professional qualifcations and
professional practice. Engineers Canada is the voice of its constituent associations in
national and international afairs, and promotes greater understanding of the nature,
role and contribution of professional engineers and engineering to society.
Te Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (Accreditation Board) is a standing
committee of Engineers Canada.
Copyright 2013 Engineers Canada
ISSN 1708-8054
* Te terms P.ENG. and ING. are ofcial marks owned by Engineers Canada.
Ingnieurs Canada est lorganisme national regroupant les 12 ordres provinciaux et territoriaux
qui rglementent lexercice du gnie au Canada et qui dlivrent les permis dexercice aux ingnieurs
du pays, actuellement plus de 260 000. Cr en 1936, Ingnieurs Canada est au service de ces
ordres, qui sont ses ordres constituants exclusifs; il leur ofre des programmes nationaux qui
visent assurer le respect des normes les plus rigoureuses en ce qui concerne la formation en gnie,
les comptences professionnelles et lexercice de la profession. Ingnieurs Canada est aussi le
porte-parole de ses ordres constituants en matire dafaires nationales et internationales et
il favorise une meilleure comprhension de la nature, du rle et de lapport de la profession
dingnieur dans la socit.
Le Bureau canadien dagrment des programmes de gnie (Bureau dagrment)
est un comit permanent dIngnieurs Canada.
2013, Ingnieurs Canada
ISSN 1708-8054
* Les termes ING. et P.ENG. sont des marques ofcielles dtenues par Ingnieurs Canada.
Accreditation Criteria and Procedures 2013 Normes et procdures dagrment 2013
ingnieurscanada engineerscanada
1
Bureau canadien dagrment des programmes de gnie
Pour lanne se terminant le 30 juin 2013
Remerciements
Le travail du Bureau canadien dagrment des programmes
de gnie dpend de nombreuses personnes. Au nom du
Bureau dagrment, je tiens remercier Ingnieurs Canada
et son conseil de leur appui. Le Bureau dagrment est trs
heureux des excellentes relations de travail quil entretient avec
les ordres constituants dIngnieurs Canada. Il travaille
galement en troite collaboration avec le Conseil canadien
des doyens dingnierie et des sciences appliques et apprcie
ses commentaires et ses conseils constructifs.
Les bnvoles sont essentiels au travail du Bureau dagrment.
Sans eux, le Bureau ne pourrait mener bien sa mission et il
est reconnaissant du dvouement dont ils font preuve et du
soutien quils reoivent de leur employeur et de leur famille.
Malcolm J. Reeves, FEC, P.Eng.
Prsident, Bureau canadien dagrment des
programmes de gnie
2013-2014
Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board
For the year ending June 30, 2013
Acknowledgements
Te Canadian Engineering Accreditation Boards work
depends on many people. On behalf of the Accreditation
Board, I wish to thank Engineers Canada and its Board
for their support. Te Accreditation Board is grateful
for the excellent working relationship it has with the
constituent associations, Engineers Canadas members. Te
Accreditation Board also works closely with the National
Council of Deans of Engineering and Applied Science and
values their constructive input, advice, and suggestions.
Volunteers are critical to the work of the Accreditation
Board. Te Board could not operate without them. Te
Board is grateful for their dedication and for the support
they receive from their employers and families.
Chair, Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board
2013-2014
2 Accreditation Criteria and Procedures 2013 Normes et procdures dagrment 2013
Table des matires Table of contents

Accreditation Board members 4 Membres du Bureau dagrment
The role of the Accreditation Board 5 Le rle du Bureau dagrment
Policy statement 6 nonc de politique
1. Terms of reference 6 1. Mandat
Purpose/Products 6 But/Produits
Authority 8 Pouvoirs
Composition 9 Composition
2. Purpose of accreditation 12 2. But de lagrment
3. Accreditation criteria 13 3. Normes dagrment
Graduate attributes 13 Qualits requises des diplms
Continual improvement 15 Amlioration continue
Students 15 tudiants
Curriculum content 16 Contenu du programme dtudes
Program environment 21 Cadre de prestation du programme
Accreditation procedures and application 24 Procdures dagrment et application de celles-ci
4. Procedures 26 4. Procdures
Initiation and timing of accreditation visit 26 Demande dagrment et moment de la visite
Selection of visiting team 26 Slection de lquipe de visiteurs
Preparation for accreditation visit 26 Prparation de la visite dagrment
Accreditation visit 27 Visite dagrment
Visiting team report 27 Rapport de lquipe de visiteurs
Accreditation decision 28 Dcision concernant lagrment
Formal review 30 Rvision officielle
Informal evaluation or visit 30 valuation ou visite non officielle
Publication 30 Diffusion
Accredited engineering programs by institution 31 Programmes de gnie agrs par tablissement
Accredited engineering programs by program title 36 Programmes de gnie agrs par titre de programme
Substantially equivalent programs 40 Programmes substantiellement quivalents
International mutual recognition agreements 43 Accords internationaux de reconnaissance mutuelle
Chairs, members and secretaries 47 Prsidents, membres et secrtaires
Constituent associations of Engineers Canada 49 Ordres constituants dIngnieurs Canada
Appendices 51 Annexes
3

Table des annexes Table of appendices

Regulations for granting transfer credits 52 Rglements pour loctroi de crdits de transfert
Interpretive statement on natural sciences 60 nonc dinterprtation sur les sciences naturelles
Interpretive statement on licensure expectations 61 nonc dinterprtation sur les attentes et les exigences
and requirements en matire de permis dexercice
Interpretive statement on curriculum content for 64 nonc dinterprtation : Matire des cours dans les options
options and dual-discipline programs dun programme et dans les programmes bidisciplinaires
Use of the K-factor 65 Utilisation du facteur K
Interpretive statement on distance learning 69 nonc dinterprtation sur la formation distance
Interpretive statement on significant change 75 nonc dinterprtation sur les changements importants
Confidentiality: policies & procedures 76 Politiques et procdures de confidentialit
Conflicts of interest guideline 85 Lignes directrices sur les conflits dintrts
Program development advisory procedure 87 Procdure consultative pour llaboration des programmes
Procedures for Engineers Canada substantial 90 Procdures sappliquant aux valuations dquivalence
equivalency evaluations substantielle dIngnieurs Canada
Guidelines relating to coincident reviews 103 Lignes directrices sur les valuations concomitantes
Procedures for formal review of an Accreditation 108 Procdures de rvision officielle dune dcision de refus
Board decision to deny accreditation dagrment rendue par le Bureau dagrment
Membres du Bureau dagrment Accreditation Board members

2013 2014

2012 2013
Secretariat Secrtariat
Gordon Griffith, FEC, ing., P.Eng. (ext./poste 274), Lynn Villeneuve, LL.B. (ext./poste 226),
Maria Arrieta, M.S. Sc. (ext./poste 262), Alexander Olivas (ext./poste 278), Johanne Lamarche (ext./poste 281)
Chair/Prsident
Senior Technical Director and
Principal Hydrogeologist
MDH Engineered Solutions Corp.
SNC-Lavalin Environment
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Vice-Chair/Vice-prsident
Grard Lachiver, ing.
Directeur de lAgence universitaire de
la Francophonie pour les Amriques
Montral, Qubec
Past-Chair/Prsident sortant
Ren Rochette, FIC, ing.
Professeur (retrait)
cole dingnierie
Universit du Qubec Trois-Rivires
Trois-Rivires, Qubec
Secretary/Secrtaire
Gordon Griffith, FEC, ing., P.Eng.
Director, Education
Engineers Canada
Ottawa, Ontario
Members/Membres
Nadia Baaziz, ing.
Professeure, Dpartement
dInformatique et dIngnierie
Universit du Qubec en Outaouais
Gatineau, Qubec
James Blatz, FEC, P.Eng.
Associate Vice-President
(Partnerships) and
Professor of Civil Engineering
207 Administration Building
University of Manitoba
Winnipeg, Manitoba
Danilo Candido, FEC, P.Eng.
Sherwood Park, Alberta
Pierre G. Lafleur, ing.
Directeur des affaires acadmiques
et internationales
cole Polytechnique de Montral
Montral, Qubec
Guy Gendron P.Eng., ing.
Vice-president, Engineering Services
Beta Machinery Analysis
Calgary, Alberta
Paula Klink, P.Eng.
Senior Environmental Specialist
Malroz Engineering Inc.
Kingston, Ontario
Michael Isaacson, FEC, P.Eng.
Professor, Department of
Civil Engineering
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, British Columbia
Richard J. Kind, FEC, P.Eng.
Professor Emeritus
Dept. of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering
Carleton University
Ottawa, Ontario
James K.W. Lee, FEC, P.Eng.
Professor, Department of Geological
Sciences and Geological Engineering
Queens University
Kingston, Ontario
Wayne MacQuarrie, FEC, P.Eng.
CEO, PEI Energy Corporation
Prince Edward Island Government
Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island
Jacques Paynter, FEC, P.Eng.
Principal
AMEC Earth & Environmental
Fredericton, New Brunswick
Graham T. Reader, P.Eng.
Special Advisor to the President
University of Windsor
Windsor, Ontario
Robert D. Dony, FEC, P.Eng
Associate Professor,
School of Engineering
University of Guelph
Guelph, Ontario
Chair/Prsident
Senior Technical Director and
Principal Hydrogeologist
MDH Engineered Solutions Corp.
SNC-Lavalin Environment
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Vice-Chair/Vice-prsident
Grard Lachiver, ing.
Doyen, Facult de gnie
Universit de Sherbrooke
Sherbrooke, Qubec
Past-Chair/Prsident sortant
Ren Rochette, FIC, ing.
Professeur (retrait)
cole dingnierie
Universit du Qubec Trois-Rivires
Trois-Rivires, Qubec
Secretary/Secrtaire
Gordon Griffith, FEC, ing., P.Eng.
Director, Education
Engineers Canada
Ottawa, Ontario
Members/Membres
Nadia Baaziz, ing.
Professeure, Dpartement
dInformatique et dIngnierie
Universit du Qubec en Outaouais
Gatineau, Qubec
James Blatz, FEC, P.Eng.
Associate Vice-President Partnerships,
Professor of Civil Engineering
Faculty of Engineering
University of Manitoba
Winnipeg, Manitoba
Danilo Candido, FEC, P.Eng.
Sherwood Park, Alberta
Michel Couturier, FEC, P.Eng.
Chemical Engineering
University of New Brunswick
Guy Gendron P.Eng., ing.
Dean, Schulich School of Engineering
University of Calgary
Calgary, Alberta
Rosamund Hyde, P.Eng.
Research Support Coordinator
Stantec
Toronto, Ontario
Michael Isaacson, FEC, P.Eng.
Civil Engineering
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, British Columbia
Richard J. Kind, FEC, P.Eng.
Professor Emeritus
Dept. of Mechanical and
Carleton University
Ottawa, Ontario
James K.W. Lee, FEC, P.Eng.
Professor, Department of Geological
Sciences and Geological Engineering
Queens University
Kingston, Ontario
Wayne MacQuarrie, FEC, P.Eng.
CEO, PEI Energy Corporation
Prince Edward Island Government
Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island
Jacques Paynter, FEC, P.Eng.
Principal
AMEC Earth & Environmental
Graham T. Reader, P.Eng.
Special Advisor to the President
University of Windsor
Windsor, Ontario
5
engineerscanada

Le rle du Bureau dagrment
En 1965, Ingnieurs Canada a institu le Bureau canadien
dagrment des programmes de gnie pour agrer les pro-
grammes de gnie qui respectent ou surpassent les normes
de formation exiges pour la dlivrance des permis dexercice
au Canada.
Le Bureau dagrment est galement charg dvaluer les
systmes dagrment dautres pays et de surveiller les activits
des organismes avec lesquels des accords de reconnaissance
mutuelle ont t signs.
Le Bureau dagrment se compose actuellement de
15 ingnieurs qui viennent des secteurs priv, public et
universitaire. Les membres du Bureau dagrment agissent
titre bnvole et reprsentent les difrentes rgions du
pays de mme quun large ventail de spcialits du gnie.
Le Bureau dagrment dpend galement des services
bnvoles dun vaste rseau dingnieurs qui font partie
des divers comits et des quipes dagrment.
Une visite dagrment nest mene qu la demande expresse
dun tablissement denseignement et avec lassentiment de
lordre provincial concern. Une quipe dingnieurs rputs est
constitue sous la direction dun membre actuel ou rcent du
Bureau dagrment. Un questionnaire dtaill est rempli par
ltablissement et envoy lquipe avant la visite. Pendant la
visite, lquipe examine de prs les comptences universitaires
et professionnelles du corps professoral, puis inspecte les
laboratoires, les installations informatiques et les quipements
collectifs, de mme que la qualit des travaux des tudiants.
Lquipe de visiteurs procde une analyse qualitative et
quantitative du contenu du programme dtudes afn de
sassurer quil rpond aux normes minimales. Lquipe
transmet ensuite ses conclusions au Bureau dagrment
qui dcide alors daccorder ou de prolonger lagrment du
programme pour une priode maximale de six ans, ou bien
de refuser lagrment.
Le Bureau dagrment publie une liste annuelle de tous les
programmes qui sont agrs ou qui lont dj t.
The role of the
Accreditation Board
In 1965, Engineers Canada established the Canadian
Engineering Accreditation Board to accredit Canadian
undergraduate engineering programs that meet or exceed
educational standards acceptable for professional engi-
neering registration in Canada.
Te Accreditation Board is also responsible for ascertaining
the equivalency of accreditation systems in other countries
and for monitoring the activities of those bodies with
which mutual recognition agreements have been signed.
Te Accreditation Board is currently composed of
15 professional engineers drawn from the private, public
and academic sectors. Te members are volunteers and
represent diferent parts of the country as well as a wide
range of engineering disciplines. Te Accreditation Board
also relies on the volunteer services of an extensive network
of professional engineers who serve on the visiting teams
and on committees.
An accreditation visit is undertaken at the invitation of
a particular institution and with the concurrence of the
association having jurisdiction. A team of senior engineers
is assembled under the direction of a current or recent
Accreditation Board member. A detailed questionnaire
is completed by the institution and sent to the team
prior to the visit. During the visit, the team examines
the academic and professional quality of faculty, adequacy
of laboratories, equipment and computer facilities and
the quality of the students work.
A qualitative and quantitative analysis of the
curriculum content is performed to ensure that it
meets the minimum criteria. Finally, the team reports
its fndings to the Accreditation Board which then
makes an accreditationdecision.It may grant (or extend)
accreditation of a program fora period of up to six years
or it may deny accreditation altogether.
Te Accreditation Board publishes an annual listing of
the accreditation history of all programs which are
presentlyor have ever beenaccredited.

Policy statement
Engineers Canada is the national organization of the
12 provincial and territorial associations that regulate
the profession of engineering in Canada and license the
countrys more than 260,000 members of the engineering
profession. Te Accreditation Board, a standing committee
of Engineers Canada, is responsible for the accreditation
of Canadian engineering programs at Higher Education
Institutions for the use of the provincial and territorial
regulatory bodies in the engineering licensure process.
Te terms of reference, criteria and procedures described in
this policy statement provide detailed terms and guidelines
for the operation of the Accreditation Board.
1. Accreditation Board terms of reference
Te Accreditation Board enhances the Engineers
Canada Boards efectiveness and efciency on
matters related to the accreditation of academic
engineering programs.
1.1 Purpose/Products
Te Accreditation Board will produce
a) information needed for the Engineers Canada
Board to make decisions on matters relating to
engineering education and accreditation both
in Canada and in other countries and
b) assessments of academic engineering programs
to determine if they meet accreditation criteria as
approved by the Engineers Canada Board.
1.1.1 On a regular basis, options and implications for
the updating of criteria, policies, and procedures for
evaluating engineering programs for accreditation
or substantial equivalency purposes.
1.1.2 Upon request of academic institutions and
based upon the Engineers Canada Board approved
criteria, an evaluation of engineering programs for
accreditation.
1.1.3 A determination of the equivalency of accreditation
systems in other countries based upon the Engineers
Canada Board approved criteria.
1.1.4 Negotiated international mutual recognition
agreements at the education level based upon
direction from the Board.
nonc de politique
Ingnieurs Canada est lorganisme national regroupant
les 12 ordres provinciaux et territoriaux qui rglementent
lexercice du gnie au Canada et qui dlivrent les permis
dexercice aux ingnieurs du pays, actuellement plus de
260 000. Le Bureau dagrment, lun des comits permanents
dIngnieurs Canada, est responsable de lagrment des pro-
grammes de gnie aux tablissements denseignement supri-
eurs pour les besoins du processus dadmission lexercice
du gnie propre aux organismes provinciaux et territoriaux.
Le mandat, les normes et les procdures dcrits dans cet
nonc de politique fournissent en dtail les modes de
fonctionnement du Bureau dagrment.
1. Mandat du Bureau dagrment
Le Bureau dagrment accrot lefcacit et lefcience
du conseil en ce qui concerne les questions lies
lagrment des programmes de gnie de niveau
universitaire
1.1 But/Produits
Le Bureau dagrment doit
a) produire les informations dont le conseil dIngnieurs
Canada a besoin pour prendre des dcisions sur les
questions lies la formation en gnie et lagrment
des programmes de gnie au Canada et ltranger et
b) efectuer lvaluation des programmes de gnie de
niveau universitaire pour dterminer sils rpondent
aux normes dagrment approuves par le conseil
dIngnieurs Canada.
1.1.1 Sur une base rgulire, options et consquences lies la
mise jour des normes, des politiques et des procdures
qui sont utilises pour valuer les programmes de gnie
des fns dagrment ou dquivalence substantielle.
1.1.2 la demande des tablissements denseignement
suprieur et en se fondant sur les normes approuves
par le conseil dIngnieurs Canada, valuation des
programmes de gnie des fns dagrment.
1.1.3 Dtermination de lquivalence des systmes
dagrment dautres pays daprs les normes
approuves par le conseil dIngnieurs Canada.
1.1.4 Accords internationaux de reconnaissance mutuelle
ngocis au plan de lducation, selon les instructions
du conseil.
7
1.1.5 Rapports priodiques au conseil dIngnieurs Canada
en ce qui concerne ltat des accords internationaux de
reconnaissance mutuelle lis lducation.
1.1.6 Liaison avec les organismes dagrment des pro-
grammes de gnie des autres pays, avec les organismes
dagrment des autres professions et avec dautres
organismes pertinents.
1.1.7 Informations et, sil y a lieu, options et consquences,
prsentes au conseil dIngnieurs Canada en ce qui
concerne les questions internationales lies lagrment
et la formation en gnie, notamment la mise en
uvre et le maintien des accords internationaux relatifs
lagrment.
1.1.8 Conseils aux ordres constituants dIngnieurs Canada
pour leur permettre de mettre en uvre les accords
internationaux de faon plus efcace.
1.1.9 Conseils sur les normes dagrment fournis aux
tablissements denseignement suprieur canadiens
au cours de llaboration de nouveaux programmes
de gnie.
1.1.10 Informations sur le systme canadien dagrment des
programmes de gnie la disposition des responsables
de llaboration des systmes dagrment de ltranger.
1.1.11 Comprhension du systme canadien dagrment
des programmes de gnie de la part des organismes
canadiens pertinents.
1.1.12 Commentaires des organismes canadiens pertinents
en ce qui concerne le systme canadien dagrment
des programmes de gnie.
1.1.13 Informations pertinentes aux autres initiatives
dIngnieurs Canada (comme les travaux lchelle
internationale) fournies au conseil, au comit perma-
nent concern ou au chef de la direction.
1.1.14 Les administrateurs des programmes de gnie
valus sont au fait des limites de lvaluation et
des responsabilits qui en dcoulent, notamment :
1.1.14.1 Ltablissement denseignement suprieur
qui ofre le programme de gnie doit respecter sans
exception les normes et les rgles dagrment, prsenter,
documents pertinents lappui, tous les aspects du
programme et aviser le Bureau dagrment de tout
changement apport son ou ses programmes agrs.
1.1.5 Regular reports to the Engineers Canada Board
regarding the status of international mutual recog-
nition agreements pertaining to education.
1.1.6 Efective liaison with engineering accrediting bodies
in other countries, with other professions accredit-
ing bodies, and with other relevant organizations.
1.1.7 Information and, when appropriate, options
and implications, to the Engineers Canada Board
on international matters relating to engineering
accreditation and education including implementa-
tion and maintenance of international accreditation
agreements.
1.1.8 Advice to Constituent Associations of Engineers
Canada to enable more efective implementation
of international agreements by the Constituent
Associations of Engineers Canada.
1.1.9 Advice regarding accreditation criteria to Canadian
higher education institutions during the develop-
ment of new engineering programs.
1.1.10 Developers of engineering accreditation systems
in other countries have information regarding the
Canadian engineering accreditation system.
1.1.11 Relevant Canadian organizations understand the
Canadian engineering accreditation system.
1.1.12 Feedback from relevant Canadian organizations
regarding the Canadian engineering accreditation
system.
1.1.13 Information relevant to other initiatives of
Engineers Canada (e.g., international work) is
provided to the Board, the respective Board
Committee, or the CEO.
1.1.14 Administrators of assessed engineering programs
are aware of the limitations of the assessment and
their resulting responsibilities, including, but not
limited to:
1.1.14.1 Te higher education institution
ofering the engineering program shall adhere to
all accreditation criteria and regulations, shall fully
disclose with relevant documentation all aspects
of the program and shall advise the Accreditation
Board immediately of any signifcant changes to
its accredited program(s).

1.1.14.2 Il ny a aucun droit lgal en ce qui a trait
lagrment. Le Bureau dagrment nest aucunement
redevable envers les tudiants, les diplms ni tout
autre tiers susceptibles dtre touchs par le refus, la
fn ou le retrait de lagrment et nassume aucune
responsabilit cet gard.
1.15 Les administrateurs des programmes valus comme
tant insufsants pour tre agrs sont au courant des
raisons et de la procdure suivre pour demander une
rvaluation ou interjeter appel.
1.2 Pouvoirs
Les pouvoirs qui sont confrs au Bureau dagrment
lui permettent dassister le conseil dans son travail sans
nuire lholisme de ce dernier.
1.2.1 Le Bureau dagrment na pas le pouvoir de modifer
les politiques du conseil.
1.2.2 Le Bureau dagrment na pas le pouvoir de dpenser ni
dengager dautres fonds de lorganisation, moins que
ces fonds aient t expressment afects par le conseil.
1.2.3 Le Bureau dagrment a le pouvoir de faire appel
au personnel pour le soutien administratif habituel
quexigent les runions.
1.2.4 Le Bureau dagrment peut, dans lexercice de ses
fonctions et de ses responsabilits, traiter directement
avec les ordres constituants dIngnieurs Canada, les
universits et les collges ou facults de gnie, ainsi
quavec dautres organismes et personnes.
1.2.5 Le Bureau dagrment na pas le pouvoir dapprouver
les normes et les procdures dagrment.
1.2.6 Le Bureau dagrment agre les programmes ou
dtermine lquivalence des systmes dagrment
dautres pays conformment aux normes et procdures
dagrment approuves par le conseil dIngnieurs
Canada.
1.2.7 Le Bureau dagrment a le pouvoir de faire appel
des spcialistes et de crer des comits ou des groupes
de travail pour laider accomplir son travail dans les
limites de son budget approuv et de son mandat. Ces
spcialistes et membres de comits nont cependant pas
de droit de vote aux runions du Bureau dagrment,
moins quils ne soient galement membres du Bureau
dagrment.
1.2.8 Le Bureau dagrment na aucun pouvoir sur les
ordres constituants ni sur leurs comits dadmission
et comits dexaminateurs.
1.1.14.2 Tere is no legal right to accreditation.
Te Accreditation Board assumes no responsibility
and shall not be liable to students, graduates or
any other party who may be afected by the denial,
termination or revocation of accreditation.
1.15 Administrators of those programs which are
assessed as being insufcient to be accredited are
aware of the reasons and the process to initiate a
reassessment or an appeal.
1.2 Authority
Te Accreditation Boards authority enables it to
assist the Board in its work, while not interfering
with Board holism.
1.2.1 Te Accreditation Board has no authority to change
Board policies.
1.2.2 Te Accreditation Board has no authority to spend
or commit other organization funds, unless such
funds are specifcally allocated by the Board.
1.2.3 Te Accreditation Board has authority to use staf
resource time normal for administrative support
around meetings.
1.2.4 Te Accreditation Board may, in carrying out its
functions and responsibilities, deal directly with the
Constituent Associations of Engineers Canada, the
universities and engineering colleges or faculties,
and other organizations and individuals.
1.2.5 Te Accreditation Board does not have authority to
approve criteria for accreditation and procedures.
1.2.6 Te Accreditation Board accredits programs or
recognizes equivalencies of engineering accredita-
tion systems in other countries in accordance with
the Engineers Canada Boards approved Criteria
for Accreditation and Procedures.
1.2.7 Te Accreditation Board has authority to call upon
specialists and to establish committees and task
forces to assist in carrying out its work within the
limits of its approved budget and terms of reference;
but such specialists and committee members have
no vote at the Accreditation Board meetings unless
they are also members of the Accreditation Board.
1.2.8 Te Accreditation Board does not have any juris-
diction over the Constituent Associations or their
registration committees or Boards of examiners.
9
1.2.9 tant donn que seuls les ordres constituants sont
habilits dlivrer des permis et reconnatre les titres
de comptence, le Bureau dagrment ne doit faire
aucune dclaration quant ladmissibilit au permis
dexercice des diplms de programmes agrs.
1.2.10 Le Bureau dagrment ne peut conclure daccords
fnanciers avec dautres organisations.
1.2.11 Pour pouvoir efectuer une visite dagrment un
tablissement denseignement suprieur, le Bureau
dagrment doit dabord recevoir une demande
dagrment de programmes de la part de cet
tablis sement.
1.2.12 Le Bureau dagrment ne peut, sans lautorisation
expresse du conseil dIngnieurs Canada, efectuer
des visites dquivalence substantielle de programmes
dans dautres pays si les cots de ces visites ne sont
pas assums par les tablissements denseignement
suprieur concerns.
1.2.13 Le Bureau dagrment ne doit pas prtendre quil
cernera chaque aspect dun programme valu qui ne
rpond pas ses normes et ses rgles dagrment.
1.3 Composition
La composition et les activits du Bureau dagrment
doivent garantir une reprsentation adquate de
lexpertise et de la diversit de la profession pour
permettre au Bureau de fonctionner de faon efcace
et efciente
1.3.1 Le Bureau dagrment comprend le prsident, le
vice-prsident, le prsident sortant et un membre de
chacune des rgions suivantes :
la Colombie-Britannique ou le Yukon
lAlberta, les Territoires du Nord-Ouest ou
le Nunavut
la Saskatchewan ou le Manitoba
lOntario
le Qubec
les provinces de lAtlantique
1.3.2 Le Bureau dagrment comprend galement au moins
six membres hors cadre. Le nombre total de membres
dpend du nombre de visites dagrment en cours et
prvues.
1.2.9 As only the Constituent Associations have author-
ity to issue licences or recognize credentials, the
Accreditation Board therefore shall make no
representation that any graduate of an accredited
program will be eligible for licensure.
1.2.10 Te Accreditation Board may not enter into
fnancial agreements with other organizations.
1.2.11 Te Accreditation Board must frst receive a
request from a higher education institution before
conducting an accreditation visit of the programs
in question.
1.2.12 Without specifc permission of the Engineers
Canada Board, the Accreditation Board may not
conduct substantial equivalency visits of engineer-
ing programs in other countries if the costs of such
visits is not borne by the respective higher educa-
tion institution.
1.2.13 Te Accreditation Board shall make no representa-
tion that it will identify every aspect of an assessed
engineering program that does not meet its accredi-
tation criteria and regulations.
1.3 Composition
Te Accreditation Boards composition and
operations shall ensure an appropriate representa-
tion of the professions expertise and diversity to
enable it to function efectively and efciently
1.3.1 Te Accreditation Board is composed of the chair,
the vice-chair, the past-chair and one each from:
British Columbia or the Yukon
Alberta, the Northwest Territories or Nunavut
Saskatchewan or Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
Atlantic Provinces

1.3.2 Te Accreditation Board is also composed of a
minimum of six members-at-large. Te total
number of members is subject to the current and
anticipated future number of accreditation visits.

1.3.3 Les membres du Bureau dagrment doivent tous
tre des ingnieurs titulaires dun permis dexercice
au Canada.
1.3.4 La prsence de dix membres formera quorum. Le prsi-
dent, le vice-prsident et le prsident sortant constitu-
ent le comit excutif du Bureau dagrment.
1.3.5 Tout doit tre fait pour que la composition du
Bureau refte la diversit des membres de la profession
dingnieur. On seforcera de maintenir un quilibre
convenable entre les reprsentants des milieux universi-
taire et non universitaire et dobtenir des reprsentants
provenant de diverses disciplines du gnie.
1.3.6 Le Comit des candidatures du Bureau dagrment
se compose de trois membres. Le reprsentant du
comit excutif dIngnieurs Canada au sein du
Bureau dagrment agira comme prsident. Les deux
autres membres seront le prsident sortant du Bureau
dagrment et le secrtaire du Bureau dagrment.
Le prsident du Bureau dagrment est, dofce,
membre du Comit.
1.3.7 Les membres du Bureau dagrment sont nomms
pour un mandat de trois ans par le conseil dIngnieurs
Canada suivant les recommandations du comit
excutif dIngnieurs Canada et en consultation avec
le Comit des candidatures du Bureau. Les nomina-
tions entrent en vigueur le 1
er
juillet de lanne de
la nomination. Le mandat des membres peut tre
prolong jusqu neuf ans, sur la base de trois mandats
conscutifs de trois ans. Dans le cas dun administra-
teur sigeant au comit excutif, des prolongations
de mandat peuvent tre accordes, et ce, jusqu un
maximum de douze ans. Le processus de nomination
de reprsentants aux comits permanents est suivi pour
sassurer de la participation des ordres constituants.
1.3.8 Le conseil dIngnieurs Canada nomme le prsident
et le vice-prsident pour un mandat dun an, en se
fondant sur les recommandations du comit excutif
dIngnieurs Canada et en consultant le Comit des
candidatures du Bureau. Le prsident devient auto-
matiquement prsident sortant la fn de son mandat.
Leur mandat peut tre prolong jusqu un maximum
de deux ans, pourvu que la prolongation ne dpasse
pas la priode maximale de douze ans (voir ci-dessus).
Les nominations entrent en vigueur le 1
er
juillet de
lanne de la nomination. Le vice-prsident est
normalement nomm prsident la suite de son
mandat titre de vice-prsident.
1.3.3 All members of the Accreditation Board must be
registered professional engineers in Canada.
1.3.4 Ten members constitute a quorum. Te chair,
the vice-chair and the past chair constitute the
Executive Committee of the Accreditation Board.
1.3.5 Every efort will be made to refect the diversity
of the membership of the engineering profession.
Consideration shall be given to maintaining a
good balance between academic and non-academic
representatives and to maintaining representation
from various disciplines.
1.3.6 Te Accreditation Board Nominating Committee
consists of three members. Te Accreditation Board
representative from the Engineers Canada Executive
Committee is the chair. Te other two members are
the Accreditation Board past-chair and the Accredi-
tation Board secretary. Te Accreditation Board
chair is an ex-ofcio member.
1.3.7 Te members of the Accreditation Board are
appointed for three years by the Engineers Canada
Board based on recommendations of the Engineers
Canada Executive Committee in consultation with
the Accreditation Board Nominating Committee.
Appointments are efective July 1 of the year of the
appointment. Te term of ofce may be extended
to nine years based on three consecutive three-year
terms. For a Director on the Executive Commit-
tee, additional extensions to their term of ofce,
to a maximum of 12 years, may be granted. Te
Process to Appoint Representatives to Standing
Committees is followed to ensure that the Constit-
uent Associations are involved in the process.
1.3.8 Te Engineers Canada Board based, on recom-
mendations from the Engineers Canada Executive
Committee, appoints the chair and the vice-chair,
both for a period of one year, in consultation with
the Accreditation Board Nominating Committee.
Te chair automatically becomes past-chair follow-
ing the completion of their term. Te terms of
ofce may be extended to a maximum of two
years, provided that the extension shall not extend
a term beyond the 12-year maximum (see above).
Appointments are efective July 1 of the year of
appointment. Te vice-chair is normally appointed
chair following their term as vice-chair.
11
1.3.9 Si un poste devient vacant au sein du Bureau
dagrment avant lexpiration du mandat, le comit
excutif dIngnieurs Canada pourvoira ce poste au
moyen dune nomination. Si un membre du Bureau
dagrment est temporairement dans limpossibilit
de sacquitter de ses fonctions, un substitut peut tre
nomm par le comit excutif dIngnieurs Canada
pour agir en labsence de ce membre.
1.3.10 Le conseil dIngnieurs Canada et le Bureau des con-
ditions dadmission peuvent nommer respectivement
des membres sans droit de vote pour les reprsenter au
Bureau dagrment. Lun des reprsentants du conseil
doit tre membre du comit excutif.

1.3.11 Le Bureau dagrment peut inviter des observateurs
ses runions, mais ceux-ci nauront pas droit de vote.
1.3.9 In the event of a vacancy occurring on the Accredi-
tation Board prior to the completion of a term of
ofce, the Engineers Canada Executive Committee
flls the vacancy by appointment. In the event that
a member of the Accreditation Board is temporarily
unable to serve, an alternate may be appointed by
the Engineers Canada Executive Committee to act
in the members absence.
1.3.10 Representatives from the Engineers Canada Board
(one of whom must be from the Executive Com-
mittee) and the Canadian Engineering Qualif-
cations Board may be appointed as non-voting
participants to the Accreditation Board by the
Engineers Canada Board and the Qualifcations
Board respectively.
1.3.11 Te Accreditation Board may invite observers to its
meetings, but such observers have no vote.

2. But de lagrment
Lagrment vise identifer, lintention des ordres
constituants dIngnieurs Canada, les programmes de gnie
dont les diplms possdent la formation universitaire
ncessaire lexercice de la profession dingnieur au Canada.
Les processus dagrment mettent laccent sur la qualit des
tudiants, du programme, du corps professoral, du personnel
de soutien et des installations et services pdagogiques.
La profession dingnieur exige de ses membres quils soient
comptents en ingnierie et comprennent les impacts du gnie
sur la socit. Ainsi, les programmes de gnie agrs doivent
permettre aux futurs diplms dacqurir non seulement des
connaissances sufsantes en mathmatiques, en sciences et en
gnie, mais aussi des comptences en communication et une
comprhension des incidences environnementales, culturel-
les, conomiques et sociales du gnie ainsi que les concepts
de dveloppement durable, et dacqurir des capacits
dapprentissage continu.
Les normes dagrment constituent un cadre gnral
permettant didentifer les programmes de gnie acceptables,
dviter la surspcialisation des programmes dtudes,
daccorder sufsamment de libert pour linnovation en
matire de formation, de tenir compte de ladaptation
divers facteurs rgionaux, et de permettre chaque tablisse-
ment denseignement dexprimer ses qualits, ses idaux et ses
objectifs ducatifs particuliers. Ces normes visent soutenir
lamlioration continue de la qualit de la formation en gnie.
Les interprtations, les rglements et les lignes directrices
sont publis en annexe et sont disponibles sur le site web
dIngnieurs Canada.
2. Purpose of accreditation
Te purpose of accreditation is to identify to the
constituent associations of Engineers Canada those
engineering programs whose graduates are academically
qualifed to begin the process to be licensed as professional
engineers in Canada. Te process of accreditation empha-
sizes the quality of the students, the academic and support
staf, the curriculum and the educational facilities.
Te engineering profession expects of its members
competence in engineering as well as an understanding of
the efects of engineering on society. Tus, accredited
engineering programs must contain not only adequate
mathematics, science, and engineering curriculum content
but must also develop communication skills, an under-
standing of the environmental, cultural, economic, and
social impacts of engineering on society, the concepts of
sustainable development, and the capacity for life-long
learning.
Te criteria for accreditation are intended to provide
a broad basis for identifying acceptable undergraduate
engineering programs, to prevent over-specialization in
curricula, to provide sufcient freedom to accommodate
innovation in education, to allow adaptation to diferent
regional factors, and to permit the expression of the
institutions individual qualities, ideals, and educational
objectives. Tey are intended to support the continuous
improvement of the quality of engineering education.
Interpretations, regulations, and guidelines are included
as appendices in this publication, and are available on the
Engineers Canada website.
13
3. Normes dagrment
Les sections qui suivent dcrivent les lments de mesure
utiliss par le Bureau dagrment pour valuer les programmes
de gnie canadiens des fns dagrment.
3.1 Qualits requises des diplms
1

Ltablissement denseignement doit dmontrer que
les diplms dun programme possdent les qualits
requises dcrites ci-aprs. Ces qualits doivent tre
interprtes dans le contexte de candidats qui vien-
nent de terminer leurs tudes. Il est reconnu que les
diplms continueront de dvelopper les assises que
leur formation en gnie leur a permis dacqurir.
3.1.1 Connaissances en gnie : connaissance, un niveau
universitaire, des mathmatiques, des sciences naturel-
les et des notions fondamentales de lingnierie, ainsi
quune spcialisation en gnie propre au programme.
3.1.2 Analyse de problmes : capacit dutiliser les connais-
sances et les principes appropris pour identifer, for-
muler, analyser et rsoudre des problmes dingnierie
complexes et en arriver des conclusions tayes.
3.1.3 Investigation : capacit dtudier des problmes
complexes au moyen de mthodes mettant en jeu la
ralisation dexpriences, lanalyse et linterprtation
des donnes et la synthse de linformation afn de
formuler des conclusions valides.
3.1.4 Conception : capacit de concevoir des solutions
des problmes dingnierie complexes et volutifs et
de concevoir des systmes, des composants ou des
processus qui rpondent aux besoins spcifs, tout en
tenant compte des risques pour la sant et la scurit
publiques, des aspects lgislatifs et rglementaires, ainsi
que des incidences conomiques, environnementales,
culturelles et sociales.
1
Bien quon sattende ce que les programmes dmontrent, preuve lappui,
quils respectent cette norme, une priode de transition et dlaboration sera
autorise. compter de juin 2015, le Bureau dagrment prendra des dcisions
tenant compte de la conformit aux normes sur les qualits des diplms.
Des lacunes pourront tre dceles en cas de non-conformit.
3. Accreditation criteria
Te following sections describe the measures used by the
Accreditation Board to evaluate Canadian engineering
programs for the purpose of accreditation.
3.1 Graduate attributes
1

Te institution must demonstrate that the
graduates of a program possess the attributes
under the following headings. Te attributes will
be interpreted in the context of candidates at the
time of graduation. It is recognized that graduates
will continue to build on the foundations that their
engineering education has provided.
3.1.1 A knowledge base for engineering: Demonstrated
competence in university level mathematics, natural
sciences, engineering fundamentals, and specialized
engineering knowledge appropriate to the program.
3.1.2 Problem analysis: An ability to use appropriate
knowledge and skills to identify, formulate, analyze,
and solve complex engineering problems in order to
reach substantiated conclusions.
3.1.3 Investigation: An ability to conduct investigations
of complex problems by methods that include
appropriate experiments, analysis and interpretation
of data, and synthesis of information in order to
reach valid conclusions.
3.1.4 Design: An ability to design solutions for complex,
open-ended engineering problems and to design
systems, components or processes that meet
specifed needs with appropriate attention to
health and safety risks, applicable standards, and
economic, environmental, cultural and societal
considerations.
1
While programs are expected to provide evidence to demonstrate
compliance with this criterion, a transition and development period
will be allowed. Starting in June 2015, the Accreditation Board will
make decisions about compliance with the Graduate Attribute criteria.
Deficiencies may be assessed in cases of non-compliance.

3.1.5 Utilisation doutils dingnierie : capacit de crer et
de slectionner des techniques, des ressources et des
outils dingnierie modernes et de les appliquer, de les
adapter et de les tendre un ventail dactivits simples
ou complexes, tout en comprenant les contraintes
connexes.
3.1.6 Travail individuel et en quipe : capacit de
fonctionner efcacement en tant que membre ou
chef dquipe, de prfrence dans un contexte de
travail multidisciplinaire.
3.1.7 Communication : habilet communiquer efcace-
ment des concepts dingnierie complexes, au sein
de la profession et au public en gnral, notamment
lire, rdiger, parler et couter, comprendre et rdiger
de facon efcace des rapports et de la documentation
pour la conception, ainsi qunoncer des directives
claires et y donner suite.
3.1.8 Professionnalisme : comprhension des rles et
des responsabilits de lingnieur dans la socit,
y compris le rle essentiel de protection du public
et lintrt public.
3.1.9 Impact du gnie sur la socit et lenvironnement :
capacit analyser les aspects sociaux et environne-
mentaux des activits lies au gnie, notamment
comprendre les interactions du gnie avec les aspects
conomiques et sociaux, la sant, la scurit, les lois et
la culture de la socit; les incertitudes lies la prvision
de telles interactions; et les concepts de dveloppement
durable et de bonne grance de lenvironnement.
3.1.10 Dontologie et quit : capacit appliquer les
principes dthique, de responsabilit professionnelle
et dquit.
3.1.11 conomie et gestion de projets : capacit
intgrer de faon approprie les pratiques dconomie
et dafaires, comme la gestion de projets, des risques
et du changement, dans lexercice du gnie, et de bien
tenir compte des contraintes associes ces pratiques.
3.1.12 Apprentissage continu : capacit cerner et
combler ses propres besoins de formation dans un
monde en constante volution, et ce, de faon
maintenir sa comptence et contribuer
lavancement des connaissances.
3.1.5 Use of engineering tools: An ability to create,
select, apply, adapt, and extend appropriate tech-
niques, resources, and modern engineering tools
to a range of engineering activities, from simple to
complex, with an understanding of the associated
limitations.
3.1.6 Individual and team work: An ability to work
efectively as a member and leader in teams,
preferably in a multi-disciplinary setting.
3.1.7 Communication skills: An ability to communicate
complex engineering concepts within the profession
and with society at large. Such ability includes read-
ing, writing, speaking and listening, and the ability
to comprehend and write efective reports and
design documentation, and to give and efectively
respond to clear instructions.
3.1.8 Professionalism: An understanding of the roles
and responsibilities of the professional engineer in
society, especially the primary role of protection
of the public and the public interest.
3.1.9 Impact of engineering on society and the
environment: An ability to analyze social and
environmental aspects of engineering activities.
Such ability includes an understanding of the
interactions that engineering has with the economic,
social, health, safety, legal, and cultural aspects of
society, the uncertainties in the prediction of such
interactions; and the concepts of sustainable design
and development and environmental stewardship.
3.1.10 Ethics and equity: An ability to apply professional
ethics, accountability, and equity.
3.1.11 Economics and project management: An ability to
appropriately incorporate economics and busi-
ness practices including project, risk, and change
management into the practice of engineering and to
understand their limitations.
3.1.12 Life-long learning: An ability to identify and to
address their own educational needs in a changing
world in ways sufcient to maintain their com-
petence and to allow them to contribute to the
advancement of knowledge.
15
3.2 Amlioration continue
On sattend ce que les programmes de gnie soient
constamment amliors. Il doit y avoir en place des
processus dmontrant que les rsultats dun pro-
gramme sont valus par rapport aux qualits requises
des diplms et que les rsultats sont utiliss pour
amliorer le programme.
3.3 tudiants
Les programmes agrs doivent tre assortis de
politiques et de procdures fonctionnelles traitant
de la qualit, de ladmission, du counselling, du
passage dune anne lautre et de la diplomation
des tudiants. Bien que les normes dagrment aient
un lien direct ou indirect avec la formation des tudi-
ants, il convient dattirer lattention sur les aspects
suivants : admission; passage dune anne lautre et
diplomation; et counselling et orientation.
3.3.1 Admission : des politiques et des processus documents
doivent tre en place en ce qui a trait ladmission
des tudiants. Ladmission dtudiants sur la base
de lintgration dacquis, des tudes antrieures, des
crdits de transfert et/ou des tudes dchange doit
tre conforme aux rglements pertinents du Bureau
dagrment. Les Rglements pour loctroi de crdits de
transfert sont inclus titre dannexe.
3.3.2 Passage dune anne lautre et diplomation : des
politiques et des processus documents doivent tre
en place en ce qui concerne le passage dune anne
lautre et la diplomation des tudiants. Ltablissement
doit vrifer que les tudiants se conforment tous ses
rglements en ce qui a trait lobtention du diplme
dans le programme indiqu sur le relev de notes et
que le programme dtudes suivi est conforme celui
du programme agr. Le nom du programme doit tre
pertinent pour tous les tudiants qui obtiennent un
diplme de ce programme.
3.3.3 Counselling et orientation : des processus et des
ressources sufsantes doivent tre prvus pour la
prestation de conseils aux tudiants.
3.3.4 Vrication des grades : lune des exigences pour
lagrment est que ltablissement doit avoir vrif,
laide de mthodologies acceptes par le Bureau
dagrment, que lensemble de ses politiques, de ses
procdures et de ses rglements relatifs aux tudiants
sappliquent tous les tudiants et sont respects par
ceux-ci.
3.2 Continual improvement
Engineering programs are expected to continually
improve. Tere must be processes in place that
demonstrate that program outcomes are being as-
sessed in the context of the graduate attributes, and
that the results are applied to the further develop-
ment of the program.
3.3 Students
Accredited programs must have functional policies
and procedures that deal with quality, admission,
counselling, promotion and graduation of students.
Although all accreditation criteria connect directly
and indirectly with their education, attention is
drawn to the following in particular: admission;
promotion and graduation; and counselling and
guidance.
3.3.1 Admission: Tere must be documented processes
and policies for admission of students. Admission
involving advanced standing, prior studies, transfer
credits and/or exchange studies must be in com-
pliance with the associated Accreditation Board
regulations. Te document entitled Regulations for
granting transfer credits is available as an appendix
in this document.
3.3.2 Promotion and graduation: Tere must be docu-
mented processes and policies for promotion and
graduation of students. Te institution must verify
that all students have met all its regulations for grad-
uation in the program identifed on the transcript
and that the curriculum followed is consistent with
that of the accredited program. Te program name
must be appropriate for all students graduating from
the program.

3.3.3 Counselling and guidance: Tere must be
processes and sufcient resources for the advising
of students.
3.3.4 Degree auditing: A requirement for accreditation
is that the institution has verifed, using methodo-
logies accepted by the Accreditation Board, that all
its student-related policies, procedures, and regula-
tions apply to, and are met by, all students.

3.4 Contenu et qualit du programme dtudes
Les normes relatives au contenu et la qualit du
programme dtudes visent assurer lacquisition de
bases solides en mathmatiques et en sciences naturel-
les, de connaissances tendues en sciences du gnie et
en conception en ingnierie, et de connaissances non
techniques venant complter les aspects techniques
de la formation. Tous les tudiants doivent satisfaire
toutes ces normes. Le programme doit tre de niveau
universitaire.
3.4.1 Approche et mthodologies de quantication
du contenu du programme dtudes
3.4.1.1 Pour toute activit menant des crdits universitaires et
pour laquelle le nombre dheures connexes correspond
au temps de contact rel entre ltudiant et les membres
du corps professoral, ou leurs supplants dsigns,
chargs de donner le programme, les units dagrment
(UA) sont dfnies comme suit (sur une base horaire) :
une heure denseignement (correspondant
50 minutes dactivit) = 1 UA
une heure de laboratoire ou de travail
dirig = 0,5 UA
Cette dfnition sapplique la plupart des cours
magistraux et des priodes de laboratoire ou de travail
dirig. Les cours dune dure autre que 50 minutes
sont considrs au prorata de cette dure. Pour valuer
le temps afect afn de dterminer les UA des diverses
composantes du programme dtudes, lon devrait
utiliser le temps denseignement rel, lexclusion
des priodes consacres aux examens fnals.
3.4.1.2 Dans le cas dune activit pour laquelle le concept
dheures de contact ne permet pas de dcrire correcte-
ment lampleur du travail, tels que dimportants
projets de conception ou de recherche, des l-
ments de pro g ramme dont lenseignement passe par
lapprentissage bas sur la rsolution de problmes,
ou des travaux comparables ofciellement reconnus
comme tant requis pour lobtention du diplme,
ltablissement denseignement doit utiliser une mesure
quivalente en units dagrment qui soit compatible
avec la dfnition prsente ci-dessus.
3.4 Curriculum content and quality
Te curriculum content and quality criteria are
designed to assure a foundation in mathematics and
natural sciences, a broad preparation in engineering
sciences and engineering design, and an exposure to
non-technical subjects that supplement the techni-
cal aspects of the curriculum. All students must
meet all curriculum content and quality criteria.
Te academic level of the curriculum must be ap-
propriate to a university-level engineering program.
3.4.1 Approach and methodologies for quantifying
curriculum content
3.4.1.1 Accreditation units (AU) are defned on an hourly
basis for an activity which is granted academic
credit and for which the associated number of hours
corresponds to the actual contact time between the
student and the faculty members, or designated
alternates, responsible for delivering the program:
one hour of lecture (corresponding to
50 minutes of activity) = 1 AU
one hour of laboratory or scheduled
tutorial = 0.5 AU
Tis defnition is applicable to most lectures
and periods of laboratory or tutorial work.
Classes of other than the nominal 50-minute
duration are treated proportionally. In assessing
the time assigned to determine the AU of various
components of the curriculum, the actual instruc-
tion time exclusive of fnal examinations should
be used.
3.4.1.2 For an activity for which contact hours do not
properly describe the extent of the work involved,
such as signifcant design or research projects,
curriculum delivered through the use of problem-
based learning, or similar work ofcially recognized
by the institution as a degree requirement, an
equivalent measure in accreditation units, consis-
tent with the above defnition, should be used by
the institution.
17
3.4.1.3 Une des faons de dterminer une mesure quivalente
en units dagrment consiste efectuer un calcul
bas sur la proportionnalit. Cette mthode repose
sur lutilisation dune unit de crdit universitaire
dfnie par ltablissement pour mesurer le contenu du
programme dtudes. Plus prcisment, un facteur, K,
est dfni comme la somme des UA pour tous les cours
obligatoires et du programme pour lesquels le calcul
a t efectu sur une base horaire, divise par la
somme des units dfnies par ltablissement pour
les mmes cours.
Ainsi, pour chaque cours dont le contenu nest pas
mesurable sur une base horaire, lon obtient le nombre
dunits dagrment en multipliant par K les units
dfnies par ltablissement pour cette activit.
UA pour tous les cours obligatoires et du programme
pour lesquels le calcul a t fait sur une base horaire
K =
units dfinies par ltablissement pour les mme cours
3.4.1.4 Le Bureau dagrment envisagera dun il favorable
des carts cette approche et ces mthodologies sil
est convaincu quune innovation judicieuse est dj
engage dans le cadre dun programme dtudes
en gnie.
3.4.2 Nombre minimum de composantes du programme
dtudes : Un programme de gnie doit comprendre le
minimum de chacune des composantes du programme
dtudes spcifes ci-dessous.
Programme complet : minimum de 1 950 UA
2

Mathmatiques : minimum de 195 UA
Sciences naturelles : minimum de 195 UA
Mathmatiques et sciences naturelles combins :
minimum de 420 UA
Sciences du gnie : minimum de 225 UA
Conception en ingnierie : minimum de 225 UA
Sciences du gnie et conception en ingnierie
combines : minimum de 900 UA
tudes complmentaires : minimum de 225 UA
Travaux en laboratoire et enseignement des mesures
de scurit
2
Bien quon sattende ce que les programmes dmontrent, preuve lappui,
tenant compte de la conformit cette norme. Des lacunes pourront tre
dceles en cas de non-conformit.
3.4.1.3 One method for determining an equivalent measure
in AU is a calculation on a proportionality basis.
Tis method relies on the use of a unit of academic
credit defned by the institution to measure curri-
culum content. Specifcally, a factor, K, is defned
as the sum of AU for all common and compulsory
courses for which the computation was carried out
on an hourly basis, divided by the sum of all units
defned by the institution for the same courses.

Ten, for each course not accounted for on an
hourly basis, the number of AU is obtained by
multiplying the units defned by the institution
for that course by K.
AU for all common and compulsory courses for which
the computation was carried out on an hourly basis
K =
units defined by the institution for the same courses
3.4.1.4 Te Accreditation Board can give consideration
to departures from this approach and these
methodologies in any case in which it receives
convincing documentation that well-considered in-
novation in engineering education is in progress.
3.4.2 Minimum curriculum components:
An engineering program must include the
minimum for the entire curriculum and for
each of its components.
Te entire program must include a minimum
of 1,950 AU
2

Mathematics: Minimum 195 AU
Natural sciences: Minimum 195 AU
Mathematics and natural sciences combined:
Minimum 420 AU
Engineering science: Minimum 225 AU
Engineering design: Minimum 225 AU
Engineering science and engineering design com-
bined: Minimum 900 AU
Complementary Studies: Minimum 225 AU
Laboratory experience and safety procedures
instruction
2
will be allowed. Starting in June 2015, the Accreditation Board will make
decisions about compliance with this criterion. Deficiencies may be as-
sessed in cases of non-compliance.

3.4.3 Minimum de 420 UA dans une combinaison de
mathmatiques et de sciences naturelles. De ce total,
au moins 195 UA doivent tre lies aux mathmatiques
et au moins 195 UA aux sciences naturelles. Lnonc
dinterprtation sur les sciences naturelles est joint ce
document titre dannexe.
3.4.3.1 Minimum de 195 UA en mathmatiques. Les
mathmatiques doivent comprendre les lments
appropris dalgbre linaire, de calcul difrentiel
et intgral, dquations difrentielles, de probabilit,
de statistique, danalyse numrique et de mathma-
tiques discrtes.
3.4.3.2 Minimum de 195 UA en sciences naturelles. La
composante des sciences naturelles du programme
dtudes doit comprendre des lments de physique
et de chimie; des lments de sciences de la vie et de
sciences de la Terre peuvent galement faire partie de
cette composante. Ces matires ont pour objet de faire
comprendre les phnomnes naturels et leurs relations au
moyen de mthodes analytiques et/ou exprimentales.
3.4.4 Minimum de 900 UA dans une combinaison de
sciences du gnie et de conception en ingnierie :
De ce total, au moins 225 UA doivent tre lies aux
sciences du gnie et au moins 225 UA la conception
en ingnierie.
3.4.4.1 Minimum de 225 UA en sciences du gnie.
Les matires en sciences du gnie mettent en jeu
lapplication des mathmatiques et des sciences
naturelles des problmes pratiques. Elles peuvent
comprendre le dveloppement de techniques
mathmatiques ou numriques, la modlisation,
la simulation et des procdures exprimentales.
Ces matires englobent notamment les aspects
appliqus de la rsistance des matriaux, de la
mcanique des fuides, de la thermodynamique,
des circuits lectriques et lectroniques, de la mca-
nique des sols, de lautomatique, de larodynamique,
des phnomnes de transfert, ainsi que des lments
de la science des matriaux, des sciences de la Terre,
de linformatique et de la science de lenvironnement.
3.4.4.2 En plus des sciences du gnie propres la spcialit,
le programme dtudes doit comprendre des cours
de sciences du gnie permettant de comprendre les
notions de base dautres spcialits du gnie.
3.4.3 A minimum of 420 AU of a combination of
mathematics and natural sciences. Within this
combination, each of mathematics and natural
sciences must not be less than 195 AU. An Inter-
pretive Statement on Natural Sciences is attached
as an appendix to this document.
3.4.3.1 A minimum of 195 AU in mathematics is
required. Mathematics is expected to include
appropriate elements of linear algebra, diferential
and integral calculus, diferential equations, prob-
ability, statistics, numerical analysis, and discrete
mathematics.
3.4.3.2 A minimum of 195 AU in natural sciences is
required. Te natural sciences component of the
curriculum must include elements of physics and
chemistry; elements of life sciences and earth sci-
ences may also be included in this category. Tese
subjects are intended to impart an understanding
of natural phenomena and relationships through the
use of analytical and/or experimental techniques.
3.4.4 A minimum of 900 AU of a combination of
engineering science and engineering design:
Within this combination, each of Engineering
Science and Engineering Design must not be
less than 225 AU.
3.4.4.1 A minimum of 225 AU in engineering science is
required. Engineering science subjects involve the
application of mathematics and natural science to
practical problems. Tey may involve the develop-
ment of mathematical or numerical techniques,
modeling, simulation, and experimental procedures.
Such subjects include, among others, the applied
aspects of strength of materials, fuid mechanics,
thermodynamics, electrical and electronic circuits,
soil mechanics, automatic control, aerodynamics,
transport phenomena, and elements of materials
science, geoscience, computer science, and environ-
mental science.

3.4.4.2 In addition to program-specifc engineering
science, the curriculum must include engineering
science content that imparts an appreciation of
the important elements of other engineering
disciplines.
19
3.4.4.3 Minimum de 225 UA en conception en ingnierie.
La conception en ingnierie intgre les mathmatiques,
les sciences naturelles, les sciences du gnie et les
tudes complmentaires pour dvelopper des lments,
des systmes et des processus qui rpondent des
besoins prcis. Il sagit dun processus cratif, itratif
et volutif qui est assujetti des contraintes pouvant
tre rgies par des normes ou des lois divers degrs
selon la spcialit. Ces contraintes peuvent tre lies
des facteurs comme lconomie, la sant, la scurit,
lenvironnement et la socit ou dautres facteurs
interdisciplinaires.
3.4.4.4 Le programme dtudes en gnie doit aboutir une
exprience denvergure de la conception en ingnierie
acquise sous la responsabilit professionnelle de
professeurs autoriss pratiquer le gnie au Canada,
de prfrence dans la province ou le territoire o est
situ ltablissement. Cette exprience denvergure de
la conception est fonde sur les connaissances et les
comptences acquises antrieurement et permet idale-
ment aux tudiants de se familiariser avec les concepts
du travail en quipe et de la gestion de projets.
3.4.4.5 Un contenu appropri exigeant lapplication doutils
dingnierie modernes doit faire partie des composantes
sciences du gnie et conception en ingnierie du
prog ramme dtudes.
3.4.5 Minimum de 225 UA en tudes complmentaires :
en sciences humaines, en sciences sociales, en arts,
en gestion, en conomie de lingnierie et en commu-
nications qui sajoutent au contenu technique du
programme dtudes et lenrichissent.
3.4.5.1 Bien quune grande latitude soit permise dans le
choix des cours complmentaires, certaines matires
sont considres essentielles la formation complte
de lingnieur. Par consquent, le programme dtudes
doit comprendre des tudes dans les matires suivantes :
a. conomie de lingnierie
b. Impact de la technologie sur la socit
c. Matires traitant des questions fondamentales,
des mthodologies et des cheminements intellectuels
propres aux sciences humaines et sociales
d. Communication orale et crite
e. Sant et scurit
f. Dontologie, quit et droit
g. Dveloppement durable et grance environnementale
3.4.4.3 A minimum of 225 AU in engineering design
is required. Engineering design integrates mathe-
matics, natural sciences, engineering sciences, and
complementary studies in order to develop elements,
systems, and processes to meet specifc needs. It is a
creative, iterative, and open-ended process, subject
to constraints which may be governed by standards
or legislation to varying degrees depending upon
the discipline. Tese constraints may also relate to
economic, health, safety, environmental, societal
or other interdisciplinary factors.
3.4.4.4 Te engineering curriculum must culminate in
a signifcant design experience conducted under
the professional responsibility of faculty licensed
to practise engineering in Canada, preferably in
the jurisdiction in which the institution is located.
Te signifcant design experience is based on the
knowledge and skills acquired in earlier work and
it preferably gives students an involvement in team
work and project management.
3.4.4.5 Appropriate content requiring the application of
modern engineering tools must be included in the
engineering sciences and engineering design com-
ponents of the curriculum.
3.4.5 A minimum of 225 AU of complementary studies:
Complementary studies include humanities, social
sciences, arts, management, engineering economics
and communications to complement the technical
content of the curriculum.
3.4.5.1 While considerable latitude is provided in the
choice of suitable content for the complementary
studies component of the curriculum, some areas of
study are essential in the education of an
engineer. Accordingly, the curriculum must include
studies in the following:
a. Engineering economics
b. Te impact of technology on society
c. Subject matter that deals with central issues,
methodologies, and thought processes of
the humanities and social sciences
d. Oral and written communications
e. Health and safety
f. Professional ethics, equity and law
g. Sustainable development and environmental
stewardship

3.4.5.2 Les tudes complmentaires peuvent comprendre
des cours de langue condition que ces cours ne soient
pas suivis pour satisfaire une exigence dadmission.
Les cours essentiellement axs sur les comptences
linguistiques peuvent tre utiliss pour combler le
nombre dUA requis en tudes complmentaires, mais
non pour satisfaire lexigence de matires qui traitent
des questions fondamentales, des mthodologies et
des cheminements intellectuels propres aux sciences
humaines et sociales.
3.4.6 Le programme doit avoir un minimum de 1 950
units dagrment de niveau universitaire.
3

3.4.7 Une exprience approprie en laboratoire doit faire
partie intgrante du programme dtudes en gnie.
Lenseignement des mesures de scurit doit tre prvu
pour permettre aux tudiants de bien se prparer aux
travaux en laboratoire et sur le terrain.
3.4.8 Tous les tudiants doivent satisfaire aux exigences
relatives au contenu du programme dtudes, y compris
les tudiants admis sur la base de lintgration dacquis,
de crdits dtudes antrieures de niveau postsecondaire,
de crdits de transfert et/ou dtudes dchange. Le
document intitul Rglements pour loctroi de crdits
de transfert est joint titre dannexe.
3.4.8.1 Il est admis que, pour les programmes oferts
dans certains tablissements, certains cours de
mathmatiques, de sciences naturelles et dtudes
complmentaires pourront avoir t suivis dans le
cadre dune formation antrieure pruniversitaire
(ou postsecondaire); dans ce cas, la politique
dadmission de ltablissement doit en tenir compte.
3.4.8.2 Les normes du Bureau dagrment ne restreignent pas
la mthode de prestation. Dans le cas de la formation
distance, le Bureau dagrment se fondera sur lnonc
dinterprtation sur la formation distance, qui est joint
ce document titre dannexe.
3
Bien que lon sattende ce que les programmes dmontrent, preuve lappui,
tenant compte de la conformit cette norme. Des lacunes pourront tre
dceles en cas de non-conformit.
3.4.5.2 Language instruction may be included within
complementary studies provided it is not taken
to fulfll an admission requirement. Furthermore,
curriculum content that principally imparts
language skills can be counted toward the required
AU of complementary studies but cannot be used
to satisfy the requirements for subject matter
that deals with central issues, methodologies, and
thought processes of the humanities and social
sciences.
3.4.6 Te program must have a minimum of 1,950
Accreditation units that are at a university level.
3

3.4.7 Appropriate laboratory experience must be an
integral component of the engineering curriculum.
Instruction in safety procedures must be included
in preparation for students laboratory and feld
experience.
3.4.8 Te requirements for curriculum content must
be satisfed by all students, including those claiming
advanced standing, credit for prior post-secondary-
level studies, transfer credits and/or credit for ex-
change studies. Te document entitled Regulations
for granting transfer credits is available as an
appendix in this document.
3.4.8.1 It is recognized that, for programs at some
institutions, some of the mathematics, natural
sciences and complementary studies components
of the curriculum may have been covered in prior
university level (or post-secondary) education
and this circumstance must be considered in
the institutions admission policy.
3.4.8.2 Tese criteria do not limit accreditation to any
particular mode of learning. In the case of distance
learning, the Accreditation Board will rely on the
Interpretive statement on distance learning, which is
attached as an appendix to this document.
3
will be allowed. Starting in June 2015 the Accreditation Board will make
decisions about compliance with this criterion. Deficiencies may be
assessed in cases of non-compliance.
21
3.5 Cadre de prestation du programme
Le Bureau dagrment examine le cadre gnral dans
lequel le programme dtudes est donn.
3.5.1 Qualit de lexprience ducative : Une importance
majeure est accorde la qualit de lexprience
ducative qui se refte dans :
3.5.1.1 La qualit, le moral et lengagement :
a. des tudiants
b. des membres du corps professoral
c. du personnel de soutien
d. de ladministration
3.5.1.2 La qualit, la pertinence et laccessibilit :
a. des laboratoires
b. de la bibliothque
c. des installations informatiques
d. des autres installations de soutien
3.5.2 Corps professoral : Le caractre distinctif de
lexprience ducative est fortement infuenc
par la comptence, lexpertise et lattitude du corps
professoral. Le corps professoral charg de dispenser le
programme doit possder les caractristiques suivantes :
3.5.2.1 Le corps professoral doit tre en nombre sufsant pour
pouvoir couvrir, en termes dexprience et dintrt,
tous les aspects du programme dtudes.
3.5.2.2 Mme sil peut comprendre du personnel temps
plein et temps partiel, le corps professoral doit
compter un nombre sufsant de professeurs temps
pleinpour assurer un niveau adquat dinteractions
avec les tudiants, pouvoir conseiller les tudiants en
matire dorientation pdagogique, et participer au
dvelop pement, au contrle et ladministration du
programme dtudes.
3.5.2.3 Les tches administratives et pdagogiques du corps
professoral devraient tre correctement quilibres, de
manire permettre aux enseignants de poursuivre des
activits de recherche, davancement des connaissances,
de dveloppement professionnel et dinteraction avec
les secteurs dindustrie.
3.5.2.4 Lexistence dun programme dtudes ne doit en aucun
cas dpendre dune seule personne.
3.5 Program environment
Te Accreditation Board considers the overall
environment in which an engineering program is
delivered.
3.5.1 Quality of the educational experience:
Major importance is attached to the quality of the
educational experience as refected by the following:
3.5.1.1 Te quality, morale, and commitment of the:
a. students
b. faculty
c. support staf
d. administration
3.5.1.2 Te quality, suitability, and accessibility of the:
a. laboratories
b. library
c. computing facilities
d. other supporting facilities
3.5.2 Faculty: Te character of the educational experience
is infuenced strongly by the competence, expertise,
and outlook of the faculty. Te faculty delivering the
program must have the following characteristics:
3.5.2.1 Tere must be sufcient faculty to cover, by
experience and interest, all areas of the curriculum.
3.5.2.2 Even though the faculty involved in delivery of
program elements may include full-time and part-
time members, there must be a sufcient number of
full-time faculty members to assure adequate levels
of student-faculty interaction, student curricular
counselling, and faculty participation in the
development, control, and administration of
the curriculum.
3.5.2.3 Faculty administrative and teaching duties should
be appropriately balanced to allow for adequate
participation in research, scholarly work, profes-
sional development activities, and industrial
interaction.
3.5.2.4 Under no circumstances should a program be
critically dependent on one individual.

3.5.3 Leadership : Le doyen de la facult de gnie
(ou son quivalent) et le directeur du dpartement
(ou ladministrateur assumant la responsabilit globale
de chaque programme de gnie) doivent assurer un
leadership efcace de la formation en gnie et jouir
de la plus haute estime au sein de la profession
dingnieur. On sattend ce quils soient titulaires
dun permis dexercice du gnie au Canada, de prf-
rence dans la province ou le territoire o est situ
ltablissement denseignement. Dans les provinces
ou territoires o lenseignement du gnie est reconnu
comme de lexercice du gnie, on sattend ce que
les administrateurs soient titulaires du permis
dexercice de la province ou du territoire en question.
Pour valuer la conformit cette norme, le Bureau
dagrment se fondera sur lnonc dinterprtation sur
les attentes et les exigences en matire de permis dexercice,
qui est joint ce document titre dannexe.
3.5.4 Expertise et comptence du corps professoral :
Les membres du corps professoral qui dispensent le
programme dtudes en gnie doivent faire preuve
dun haut niveau dexpertise et de comptence et
promouvoir les objectifs de la formation en gnie
et de la profession autorglemente de lingnieur.
La comptence globale du corps professoral est
value en fonction des critres suivants :
La formation universitaire de ses membres.
La diversit de cette formation, y compris la nature
et ltendue de leur exprience du secteur industriel.
Leur capacit communiquer efcacement.
Leur exprience en enseignement, recherche et
conception.
Leur niveau de connaissances dmontr par des
publications dans le domaine du gnie, ainsi que
des publications scientifques et professionnelles.
Leur degr de participation des socits dingnieurs
et des socits professionnelles, scientifques et savantes.
Leur intrt personnel lgard des activits axes sur le
programme dtudes et des activits hors programme,
et leur soutien document de ces activits.
Leur apprciation du rle et de limportance de la
profession autorglemente de lingnieur, et dune
attitude positive lgard du permis dexercice et leur
participation aux afaires professionnelles.
3.5.3 Leadership: Te dean of engineering (or equivalent
ofcer) and the head of an engineering program
(or equivalent ofcer with overall responsibility for
each engineering program) are expected to provide
efective leadership in engineering education and to
have high standing in the engineering community.
Tey are expected to be engineers licensed in
Canada, preferably in the jurisdiction in which
the institution is located. In those jurisdictions
where the teaching of engineering is the practice
of engineering, the ofcers are expected to be
engineers licensed in that jurisdiction. To evaluate
this criterion, the Accreditation Board will
rely on the Interpretive statement on licensure
expectations and requirements, which is attached

3.5.4 Expertise and competence of faculty:
Faculty delivering the engineering curriculum
are expected to have a high level of expertise and
competence, and to be dedicated to the aims of
engineering education and of the self-regulating
engineering profession, which will be judged by
the following factors:
Te level of academic education of its members.
Te diversity of their backgrounds, including the
nature and scope of their non-academic experience.
Teir ability to communicate efectively.
Teir experience in teaching, research, and design
practice.
Teir level of scholarship as shown by scientifc,
engineering, and professional publications.
Teir degree of participation in professional,
scientifc, engineering, and learned societies.
Teir personal interest in, and documented
support of, the curriculum and program-related
extra-curricular activities.
Teir appreciation of the role and importance of
the self-regulating engineering profession, and of
positive attitudes towards professional licensure and
involvement in professional afairs.
23
3.5.5 Statut des membres du corps professoral lgard
de la profession dingnieur : Les professeurs qui
donnent des cours portant essentiellement sur les
sciences du gnie et la conception en ingnierie
devraient tre titulaires dun permis dexercice du
gnie au Canada, de prfrence dans la province ou
le territoire o est situ ltablissement denseignement.
Dans les provinces ou territoires o lenseignement du
gnie est reconnu comme de lexercice du gnie, on
sattend ce que ces professeurs soient titulaires
du permis dexercice de la province ou du territoire
en question. Pour valuer la conformit cette
norme, le Bureau dagrment se fondera sur lnonc
dinterprtation sur les attentes et les exigences en matire
de permis dexercice, qui est joint ce document
titre dannexe.
3.5.6 Ressources nancires : Les ressources fnancires
de ltablissement denseignement doivent tre
sufsantes pour assurer :
Le recrutement, le maintien en poste et le
dvelop pement professionnel continu de
professeurs qualifs;
Le recrutement, le maintien en poste et le dvelop-
pement professionnel continu de personnel de
soutien qualif;
Lacquisition, lentretien et le renouvellement des
infrastructures;
Lacquisition, lentretien et le renouvellement des qui-
pements.
3.5.7 Contrle et responsabilit du programme de gnie :
Le conseil de la facult de gnie (ou linstance universi-
taire quivalente) doit exercer un contrle clair et
document sur le contenu du programme dtudes,
et en assumer la responsabilit, quelle que soit la
structure administrative du programme de gnie
en question.
3.5.8 Comit des tudes : Les modifcations apportes
au programme dtudes en gnie devraient tre
supervises par un comit des tudes ofciellement
constitu. La majorit des membres de ce comit
devraient tre des ingnieurs titulaires dun permis
dexercice au Canada, de prfrence dans la prov-
ince ou le territoire o est situ ltablissement
denseignement. Dans les provinces ou territoires
o lenseignement du gnie est reconnu comme de
lexercice du gnie, on sattend ce que ces ingnieurs
soient titulaires du permis dexercice de la province
ou du territoire en question.
3.5.5 Professional status of faculty members:
Faculty delivering curriculum content that is
engineering science and/or engineering design are
expected to be licensed to practise engineering in
Canada, preferably in the jurisdiction in which the
institution is located. In those jurisdictions where
the teaching of engineering is the practice of
engineering, they are expected to be licensed
in that jurisdiction. To evaluate this criterion,
the Accreditation Board will rely on the Interpretive
statement on licensure expectations and requirements,
which is attached as an appendix to this document.

3.5.6 Financial resources: Financial resources must
be sufcient to ensure that:
Qualifed academic staf can be recruited, retained,
and provided with continuing professional
development.
Qualifed support staf can be recruited, retained,
and provided with continuing professional
development.
Infrastructure can be acquired, maintained,
and renewed.
Equipment can be acquired, maintained,
and renewed.
3.5.7 Authority and responsibility for the engineering
program: Te Engineering Faculty Council (or
equivalent engineering body) must have clear,
documented authority and responsibility for the
engineering program, regardless of the administra-
tive structure within which the engineering
program is delivered.
3.5.8 Curriculum committee: Engineering program
curriculum changes are expected to be overseen
by a formally structured curriculum committee.
Te majority of the members of the committee
are expected to be licensed professional engineers
in Canada, preferably in the jurisdiction in which
the institution is located. In those jurisdictions
where the teaching of engineering is the practice
of engineering, they are expected to be licensed
in that jurisdiction.

3.6 Procdures dagrment et application
de celles-ci
3.6.1 Lagrment sapplique aux programmes, non pas aux
dpartements ni aux facults.
3.6.2 Lvaluation dun programme nest entreprise qu la
demande dun tablissement denseignement et avec
le consentement de lordre comptent.
3.6.3 Le processus dagrment comprend deux parties :
lvaluation du programme efectue par une quipe de
visiteurs et la dcision dagrment prise par le Bureau
dagrment. Lvaluation du programme est base sur
les donnes dtailles fournies par ltablissement et
sur lopinion collective des membres de lquipe de
visiteurs. La dcision dagrment prise par le Bureau
dagrment est base sur des critres la fois qualitatifs
et quantitatifs.
3.6.4 Pour les besoins de lagrment, un programme
de gnie se caractrise par un programme dtudes
ofciellement approuv et publi, considr comme
une entit distincte par ltablissement denseignement.
Le Bureau dagrment examine toutes les options du
programme. Suivant le principe selon lequel la solidit
dun programme se mesure par son maillon le plus
faible , un programme dtudes nest agr que si
toutes ses options satisfont aux normes tablies.
3.6.5 Un programme agr doit comprendre le mot gnie
ou ingnierie dans son titre.
3.6.6 Le titre dun programme de gnie agr doit bien
dcrire le contenu du programme dtudes.
3.6.7 Si, en vertu de son titre, un programme doit rpondre
aux exigences dagrment de deux programmes ou
plus, le programme en question doit satisfaire aux
exigences dagrment du Bureau dagrment pour
chacun des programmes de gnie nomms.
3.6.8 Le Bureau dagrment nvalue ni nagre les diplmes,
grades, certifcats ou composantes de programmes autres
que des programmes de gnie. Seul le programme de
gnie menant un diplme fgurera dans le rapport
annuel, la section des programmes de gnie agrs.
3.6.9 Le Bureau dagrment doit avoir des preuves que toutes
les options du programme de gnie ofrent un contenu
distinct sufsant et que le nom de chaque option dcrit
bien le contenu en question. cet gard, le document
nonc dinterprtation : Matire des cours dans les
options dun programme et dans les programmes
bidisciplinaires est joint titre dannexe.
3.6 Accreditation procedures and application
3.6.1 Accreditation applies only to programs, not to
departments or faculties.
3.6.2 Application of the accreditation process to an engi-
neering program is undertaken only at the invita-
tion of a particular institution and with the consent
of the appropriate regulator.
3.6.3 Te accreditation process comprises two parts:
program evaluation by a visiting team and
accreditation decision by the Accreditation Board.
Te evaluation of the program is based on detailed
data provided by the institution and on the
collective opinion of the members of the visiting
team. Te accreditation decision is made by the
Accreditation Board based on qualitative and
quantitative considerations.
3.6.4 For purposes of accreditation, a program is
characterized by a formally approved and published
curriculum that is regarded as an entity by the insti-
tution and that can be considered independently.
All options in the program are examined. Following
the principle that a program is only as strong as its
weakest link, a program is accredited only if all
such options meet the criteria.
3.6.5 An accredited program must have the word
engineering in its title.
3.6.6 Te title of an accredited engineering program must
be properly descriptive of the curriculum content.
3.6.7 If a program, by virtue of its title, becomes
subject to the content requirements for two or
more engineering curricula, then the program
must meet the Accreditation Board requirements
for each engineering curriculum named.
3.6.8 Te Accreditation Board does not evaluate or
accredit non-engineering degrees, diplomas, or
certifcates or components thereof; only the
engineering degree will be listed in the annual
report section on accredited engineering programs.
3.6.9 Te Accreditation Board must have evidence that
all engineering options contain a signifcant amount
of distinct curriculum content and that the name
of each option is descriptive of that curriculum con-
tent. An Interpretive statement on curriculum content
for options and dual-discipline programs is attached
25
3.6.10 Le Bureau dagrment doit avoir des preuves que
le titre du programme est appropri pour tous les
tudiants obtenant un diplme dans le cadre du
programme, peu importe loption choisie.
3.6.11 Lagrment ne peut tre accord quune fois que le
programme compte des tudiants diplms. Dans le
cas dun nouveau programme, une visite dagrment
peut tre efectue au cours de la dernire anne de la
premire promotion.
3.6.12 Lagrment est accord pour une priode ne dpassant
normalement pas six ans.
3.6.13 Toute modifcation importante apporte un
programme agr pendant la priode dagrment doit
tre signale au Bureau dagrment. Tout changement
li un aspect cit dans les Normes et procdures
dagrment et les rglements connexes constitue un
changement dimportance exigeant la prsentation
dun rapport cet gard et pouvant ncessiter une
rvaluation immdiate. Tout changement dans le
titre dun programme agr exige lapprobationdu
Bureau dagrment pour que lagrment soit maintenu.
Ltablissement qui fournit des informations pour
le renouvellement ou la prolongation de lagrment
dun programme a lobligation de faire ressortir tout
changement apport au programme en question
et den aviser le Bureau dagrment. Lnonc
dinterprtation sur les changements importants
est joint ce document titre dannexe.
3.6.14 Le Bureau dagrment se rserve le droit de modifer
le statut dagrment de tout programme de nimporte
quel tablissement sil dcouvre quun programme
agr nest pas conforme lune ou lautre de ses
normes ou de ses rgles dagrment.
3.6.10 Te Accreditation Board must have evidence that
the program name is appropriate for all students
graduating in the program regardless of the
option taken.
3.6.11 Accreditation of a program is granted only
after students have graduated from the program.
For new programs, an accreditation visit may
be undertaken in the fnal year of the frst
graduating class.
3.6.12 Accreditation is granted for a period of time up to
and normally not exceeding six years.
3.6.13 Any signifcant change that takes place during the
term of accreditation of an accredited engineering
program must be reported to the Accreditation
Board. Any change related to an aspect referred
to in the Accreditation Criteria and Procedures
and related regulations is a signifcant change
giving rise to the reporting obligations and may
necessitate an immediate reassessment. Any change
in the title of an accredited program requires
approval by the Accreditation Board for that
programs continued accreditation. When an
institution supplies information for the renewal
or extension of accreditation, it has an obligation
to highlight and notify the Accreditation Board
of any changes to the program. An Interpretive
statement on signifcant change is attached as an
appendix to this document.
3.6.14 Te Accreditation Board reserves the right to alter
the accreditation status of any program at any
institution if it is discovered that such program is
not in compliance with any of the Accreditation
Boards accreditation criteria or regulations.

4. Procdures
4.1 Demande dagrment et moment de la visite
Le processus dvaluation dun programme en vue de
son agrment nest amorc qu la demande expresse
dun tablissement et avec le consentement du membre
constituant dIngnieur Canada concern. Une visite
dagrment visant lvaluation ou la rvaluation dun
ou de plusieurs programmes de gnie a lieu normale-
ment en octobre ou en novembre. Une demande cette
fn doit tre prsente par ltablissement et parvenir au
secrtariat du Bureau dagrment au plus tard le 1
er
jan-
vier de lanne civile durant laquelle aura lieu la visite.
4.2 Slection de lquipe de visiteurs
Le Bureau dagrment nomme un prsident de lquipe
de visiteurs; normalement, il sagit dun membre du
Bureau dagrment. Les autres membres sont choisis
par le prsident de lquipe, sauf dans le cas du ou
des membres nomms par le Bureau dagrment en
consultation avec lordre constituant dIngnieurs
Canada concern. Les membres de lquipe de visiteurs
doivent tous tre des ingnieurs titulaires dun permis
dexercice du gnie au Canada. Ltablissement peut
demander le remplacement dun membre de lquipe,
mais uniquement pour des motifs valables. Tel que
prcis larticle 1.4.9, des spcialistes peuvent agir
titre de personnes ressources au sein des quipes.
4.3 Prparation de la visite dagrment
Plusieurs mois avant la date de la visite, le secrtariat
du Bureau dagrment fait parvenir ltablissement la
documentation requise pour la visite. Cette documenta-
tion comprend : un questionnaire qui doit tre rempli
par ltablissement, un tat dtaill des procdures
suivre avant, pendant et aprs la visite, certains docu-
ments exigs par lquipe de visiteurs et par le Bureau
dagrment et un chancier dcrivant le procd com-
plet jusqu son dnouement, soit la transmission,
ltablissement, de la dcision concernant lagrment.
Des copies du questionnaire dment rempli, accom-
pagnes de documents dappui, sont transmises par
ltablissement et doivent parvenir chaque membre
de lquipe et au secrtariat du Bureau dagrment au
moins six semaines avant le dbut de la visite. Si la
documentation nest pas reue telle que demande,
le comit excutif du Bureau dagrment peut, aprs
avoir consult le prsident de lquipe de visiteurs,
annuler la visite.
4. Procedures
4.1 Initiation and timing of accreditation visit
An accreditation assessment is initiated only at the
invitation of an institution and with the consent
of the appropriate member of Engineers Canada.
An accreditation visit to assess or reassess an
engineering program or programs normally takes
place in October or November. A request from
the institution for such a visit must be received
by the Accreditation Board Secretariat by
January 1 of the calendar year in which the
visit is to take place.
4.2 Selection of visiting team
Te Accreditation Board selects a chair for the
visiting team; usually, the chair is a member of
the Accreditation Board. Te other members of the
visiting team are selected by the chair except for
the member(s) selected by the Accreditation Board
in consultation with the appropriate constituent
association of Engineers Canada. All visiting team
members must be registered professional engineers.
A request for a replacement on the visiting team
may be made by the institution only for good cause.
Specialists, as outlined in Section 1.4.9, may be
used as resource persons on visiting teams.
4.3 Preparation for accreditation visit
Several months before the date of an accreditation
visit, the Accreditation Board Secretariat sends to
the institution documentation required for the visit.
Tis documentation includes: a questionnaire to
be completed by the institution, details regarding
procedures to be followed before, during and after
the visit, documentation required by the visiting
team and the Accreditation Board and a schedule
of events for the entire process which concludes
with the Accreditation Boards accreditation deci-
sion report to the institution.
Copies of the questionnaire, with supporting
documentation, completed by the institution must
be received by each visiting team member and the
Accreditation Board Secretariat at least six weeks
before the visit. If adequate documentation is
not received as required, the Accreditation Board
Executive Committee, in consultation with the
visiting team chair, may cancel the visit.
27
4.4 Visite dagrment
Une visite dagrment se droule normalement sur
trois jours. Elle permet de faire lvaluation qualitative
de facteurs tels que lambiance intellectuelle, le moral,
lattitude professionnelle et la qualit du personnel et
des tudiants. La visite donne loccasion de mener des
activits telles que :
a. des entretiens avec certains membres de la haute
direction, y compris le prsident ou recteur,
le doyen de la facult de gnie et les directeurs
de dpartements responsables des programmes;
b. des entretiens individuels et en groupes avec les
membres du corps professoral pour en juger le profes-
sionnalisme, la motivation et lattitude ainsi que pour
tablir le juste milieu des opinions sur les aspects
thoriques et pratiques du programme dtudes;
c. des entretiens avec les tudiants, individuels et
en groupes;
d. une tourne des installations physiques telles que
les laboratoires, les bibliothques et les installations
informatiques, dans le but den valuer lefcacit;
e. une revue dexamens rcents, de feuillets dinstructions
de laboratoire, de bulletins de notes (anonymes au
besoin), de rapports et de thses dtudiants, de
modles ou dappareils construits par les tudiants
et dautres preuves de ralisations dtudiants.
Avant la fn de la visite, lquipe rencontre une dernire
fois le doyen et, autant que possible, les directeurs
de dpartements responsables des programmes afn
de passer en revue les points forts et les points faibles
perus dans chaque programme et de leur faire part
des lments proccupants.
4.5 Rapport de lquipe de visiteurs
Le prsident, en collaboration avec les membres de
son quipe, rdige un compte rendu des constatations
de lquipe sur le ou les programmes examins durant
la visite. Ce rapport indique les points forts et les
points faibles perus, les lments conformes et ceux
non conformes aux normes du Bureau dagrment,
tels quinterprts par les membres de lquipe, les
lments de proccupation (autant pour le moment
que pour lavenir) et des suggestions damlioration,
le cas chant. Ce rapport ne comprend aucune
recommandation au Bureau dagrment concernant
lagrment.
4.4 Accreditation visit
An accreditation visit normally spans over three
days. It provides an opportunity for the visiting
team to assess qualitative factors such as intellectual
atmosphere and morale, professional attitudes and
quality of staf and students. Te visit provides the
opportunity for such activities as:
a. interviews with appropriate senior administra-
tive ofcers, including the president, the dean of
engineering and the chairs of the departments
responsible for the programs,
b. interviews with individuals and groups of faculty
members to evaluate professional attitudes,
motivations, morale and the balance of opinions
concerning theoretical and practical elements of
the curriculum,
c. interviews with individuals and groups of
students,
d. tours of physical facilities such as laboratories,
libraries and computing facilities to evaluate their
efectiveness, and
e. a review of recent examination papers, laboratory
instruction sheets, student transcripts (anonymous,
if necessary), student reports and theses, models
or equipment constructed by students and other
evidence of student performance.
Before the end of the visit, the visiting team meets
with the dean and, preferably, the chairs of the
departments responsible for the programs to review
the perceived strengths and weaknesses of the
programs and to indicate any areas of concern.
4.5 Visiting team report
Te chair of the visiting team, working with the
team members, prepares a report on the program(s)
visited. Tis is a report of the teams fndings which
includes: perceived strengths and weaknesses; areas
of conformance to and deviation from the Accredi-
tation Board criteria, as interpreted by the visiting
team; matters of concern (both for the present and
for the future); and, suggestions for improvement, if
any. No recommendations for Accreditation Board
accreditation action are included in the report.

Les constatations de lquipe, telles quexposes
dans le rapport, sont transmises par le secrtariat
du Bureau dagrment ltablissement afn que ce
dernier y ragisse et fasse part de ses commentaires
et vrife si les informations sont exactes et compltes.
Ltablissement peut profter de cette occasion pour
faire part damliorations mises en uvre dans lanne
universitaire en cours. Le Bureau dagrment peut
communiquer avec ltablissement et le prsident de
lquipe afn de sassurer que le dossier concernant
le ou les programmes est bien complet.
4.6 Dcision concernant lagrment
La dcision concernant lagrment prise par
le Bureau dagrment dcoule dinformations
obtenues la suite de la visite dagrment ou
de rapports prpars par ltablissement la
demande du Bureau dagrment.
Pour en arriver une dcision la suite dune
visite dagrment, le Bureau dagrment prend en
considration les antcdents en matire dagrment,
les donnes contenues dans le questionnaire rempli
par ltablissement, le rapport de lquipe de visiteurs,
les ractions de ltablissement en rponse au rapport
de lquipe, toute autre correspondance explicative et
toute autre information pertinente.
Pour en arriver une dcision la suite de la rception
dun rapport quil a demand, le Bureau dagrment
prend en considration ce rapport et toute autre
information pertinente.
4.6.1 Lagrment est accord pour une certaine priode,
la priode maximale tant de six ans; toute priode
dagrment peut tre conditionnelle ce que ltablis-
sement satisfasse une ou plusieurs exigences. Cette
priode se termine toujours le 30 juin de lanne
spcife dans la dcision et sa dure peut tre rvise,
pour un motif valable, en tout temps. Tout change-
ment dans un programme agr qui contrevient
aux con ditions selon lesquelles lagrment a t
accord peut entraner une rvaluation immdiate
du prog ramme ou le retrait de lagrment ou les
deux. Lagrment est accord lorsque le Bureau
dagrment juge que le programme satisfait aux
normes ofcielles du Bureau dagrment au moment
o la dcision est prise.
Dans certains cas, une priode dagrment de moins de
six ans est accorde simplement pour la faire concider
avec la priode dagrment dautres programmes de
ltablissement. Il va sans dire que si le Bureau dagr-
Te visiting teams fndings, as outlined in
the report, are sent by the Accreditation Board
Secretariat to the institution for comment and
reaction and to ensure accuracy and completeness.
Tis also provides an opportunity for the institution
to advise on improvements being implemented in
the current academic year. Te Accreditation Board
may communicate with both the institution and
the visiting team chair with the intent of ensuring
that the program dossier is complete.
4.6 Accreditation decision
Te accreditation decision is made by the
Accreditation Board as the result of information
gained from the accreditation visit process or from
reports submitted by the institution at the request
of the Accreditation Board.
In arriving at an accreditation decision following
a visit, the Accreditation Board considers the
accreditation history, the information included in
the completed questionnaire, the visiting team
report, the institutions response to the visiting team
report, any further clarifying correspondence and
any other relevant information.
In arriving at a decision following receipt of a report
requested by the Accreditation Board, the Accredi-
tation Board considers that report and any other
relevant information.
4.6.1 Accreditation of a program is granted for a specifc
term, the maximum being six years. Any term of
accreditation may be conditional upon the
institution satisfying one or more requirements.
Te accreditation term ends on June 30 of the
specifed year. Te term of accreditation is subject
to review for cause at any time. Changes in an
accredited program which violate the conditions
under which accreditation was granted by the
Accreditation Board may lead to an immediate
reassessment of the program and/or termination
of accreditation. Accreditation is granted if the
Accreditation Board judges that, at the time of
the decision, the program meets the published
Accreditation Board criteria.
In some cases, accreditation for less than six years
is granted to make the term of accreditation of the
program coincide with the term of accreditation
of the other programs at the institution. Moreover,
29
ment juge que certains aspects sont proccupants, la
priode dagrment du programme en question peut
tre infrieure six ans.
Il peut arriver quun programme soit agr
provisoirement pour une priode limite, mais que
cette priode puisse tre prolonge (jamais au-del
de six ans) sur rception dun rapport tablissant de
faon convaincante que les points proccupants ont
t rsolus comme il se doit. Aprs avoir tudi le
rapport, le Bureau dagrment peut dcider de
prolonger la priode dagrment ou dmettre
un avis de retrait dagrment.
Sil juge quun programme dj agr dmontre
des faiblesses importantes, le Bureau dagrment
met un avis de retrait dagrment. De mme, sil
juge quun programme non agr ne satisfait pas
ses normes ofcielles, le Bureau dagrment refuse
daccorder lagrment.
4.6.2 La dcision du Bureau dagrment est com-
munique au doyen et au prsident ou recteur
de ltablissement, le doyen recevant galement
lexplication complte de la dcision. Il incombe
ltablissement de faire part aux tudiants et au
personnel du processus dagrment et du statut du
programme en matire dagrment.
4.6.3 Un avis de retrait dagrment prcise que
lagrment du programme est prolong pour
une priode maximale de trois ans aprs quoi il
sera retir, moins que le Bureau dagrment juge,
avant la fn de cette priode, que les points proccu-
pants nots ont t rsolus de manire adquate.
Pour le dterminer, il se peut quun rapport et une
visite dagrment soient tous deux ncessaires. Si le
Bureau dagrment juge que les points proccupants
nots nont pas t rsolus de manire adquate,
lagrment du programme prend fn la date
mentionne dans lavis de retrait dagrment. Si
le Bureau dagrment juge le contraire, lagrment
est prolong pour une priode approprie et le
programme ne subit aucun arrt dagrment.

4.6.4 Si lagrment est refus dans le cas dun programme
non agr, ltablissement peut prsenter une demande
de nouvelle visite anticipe. Cette demande, accom-
pagne dune description des changements valables
qui ont t mis en uvre, doit parvenir au secrtariat
du Bureau dagrment dans les 60 jours qui suivent
if the Accreditation Board judges that there are areas
of concern, accreditation may be granted for a term
of less than six years.
A program may be granted a limited-term
accreditation, extendable to a longer term (not
exceeding six years), subject to receipt of a report
which convinces the Accreditation Board that the
matters giving rise to its concerns have been resolved
adequately. After reviewing the report, the Accredita-
tion Board may extend the accreditation or it may
issue a notice of termination of accreditation.
If the Accreditation Board judges that signifcant
weaknesses exist in a currently accredited program,
a Notice of Termination of Accreditation is issued.
If the Accreditation Board judges that a currently
unaccredited program does not meet the published
Accreditation Board criteria, accreditation of the
program is denied.
4.6.2 Following an Accreditation Board accreditation
decision, the institution is notifed of the decision
through the dean and the president and the dean
is provided with a comprehensive explanation for
it. Te institution is expected to inform students
and staf of the process of accreditation and of the
accreditation status of the program.
4.6.3 A notice of termination of accreditation specifes
that the accreditation of the program is extended for
a maximum of three years at which time the accredi-
tation is terminated unless the Accreditation Board
judges, before that date, that the matters giving rise
to its concerns have been resolved adequately. To
determine whether these matters have been resolved
adequately, both a report and an accreditation visit
may be required. If the Accreditation Board judges
that the matters giving rise to its concerns have not
been resolved adequately, the accreditation of the
program is terminated on the date specifed in the
original Notice of Termination of Accreditation. If
the Accreditation Board judges that the matters giv-
ing rise to its concerns have been resolved adequately,
accreditation is extended for an appropriate period
and no loss of accreditation will have occurred.
4.6.4 In the event that an unaccredited program is denied
accreditation, the institution may submit a request
for an early re-visit. Tis request, accompanied by
a description of positive changes that have been
implemented, must be received by the Accreditation
Board Secretariat within 60 days of the notifcation

la date de communication de la dcision de refus du
Bureau dagrment. Si le comit excutif du Bureau
dagrment juge quil y a eu des amliorations impor-
tantes, une nouvelle visite a lieu au cours de lautomne
ou de lhiver qui suit le refus dagrment.
4.7 Rvision officielle
Dans le cas o le Bureau dagrment dcide de retirer
lagrment dun programme ou de refuser daccorder
lagrment un programme non agr, ltablissement
peut prsenter une demande de rvision ofcielle de
la dcision du Bureau dagrment. Le processus de
rvision ofcielle est tabli par Ingnieurs Canada.
Les Procdures de rvision ofcielle dune dcision de
refus dagrment rendue par le Bureau dagrment
sont jointes en annexe.
4.8 valuation ou visite non officielle
la demande dun tablissement, le Bureau
dagrment aide prendre les dispositions ncessaires
pour quune valuation non ofcielle dune proposition
ou une visite non ofcielle dun programme non agr
ait lieu un moment opportun de llaboration du
programme en question. Cette valuation ou cette visite
a pour objet de fournir ltablissement des commen-
taires et des conseils propos de ce programme. Le
Bureau dagrment ne prend aucun engagement en
ce qui concerne lagrment ventuel du programme.
Un rapport est transmis ltablissement, mais aucun
rapport nest prsent au Bureau dagrment. Les
cots lis lvaluation ou la visite, y compris une
rmunra tion symbolique pour les visiteurs ou les
personnes qui ont t charges de lvaluation, sont
la charge de ltablissement.
4.9 Diffusion
Les dossiers et les dlibrations du Bureau dagrment
demeurent confdentiels. La liste des programmes
agrs est tenue jour par le secrtariat du Bureau
dagrment et ne comprend que les programmes
agrs par le Bureau dagrment avec la ou les dates
de validit. Cette liste est disponible sur demande
et est publie dans le rapport annuel du Bureau
dagrment. Les documents dcrivant les politiques
et les procdures du Bureau dagrment sont gale-
ment tenus jour par le secrtariat du Bureau
dagrment et sont disponibles sur demande.
to the institution of the accreditation action of the
Accreditation Board. If the Accreditation Board
Executive Committee is satisfed that positive
changes of substance have been made, a re-visit
will be scheduled for the fall or winter immediately
following the decision to deny accreditation.
4.7 Formal review
In the event of a decision by the Accreditation Board
to terminate the accreditation of a program or to
deny accreditation to an unaccredited program, the
institution may apply for a formal review of the
Accreditation Board decision. Te formal review
follows procedures established by Engineers Canada.
Te Procedures for formal review of an Accreditation
Board decision to deny accreditation are included
as an appendix in this publication.
4.8 Informal evaluation or visit
If requested by an institution, the Accreditation
Board will assist to arrange for an informal evaluation
of a proposal or an informal visit to an unaccredited
program at an appropriate time in its development.
Te purpose of the evaluation or visit is to provide
comment and advice to the institution with respect
to the program. No undertaking is given by the
Accreditation Board as to the eventual accredita-
tion of the program. A report is presented to the
institution. No report is presented to the Accredita-
tion Board. Te cost of such an evaluation or visit,
including nominal compensation for the visitors or
persons who are asked to carry out the evaluation,
is borne by the institution.

4.9 Publication
Records and deliberations of the Accreditation
Board are kept confdential. Te list of accredited
programs maintained by the Accreditation Board
includes only those programs that have been accred-
ited by the Accreditation Board, together with the
efective date or dates. Te list is made available on
request and is published in the annual report of the
Accreditation Board. Documents describing policies
and procedures of the Accreditation Board are also
maintained by the Accreditation Board Secretariat
and are available upon request.
31
Programmes de gnie agrs
par tablissement
Remarques :
a) La liste des programmes agrs ne comprend que les
programmes de gnie menant au grade de bachelier.
b) Les tablissements denseignement numrs ont, de leur
propre chef, demand au Bureau dagrment dvaluer
certains de leurs programmes. La terminologie utilise
est celle qui a t choisie par ltablissement.
c) Lorsque le nom dun programme est suivi dune seule
date, cette date correspond lanne de la premire
promotion laquelle lagrment sapplique. Lagrment
sapplique galement aux annes subsquentes et est
toujours en vigueur.
d) Lorsque le nom dun programme est suivi de deux
dates, ces dates correspondent la priode (y compris
les deux annes mentionnes) pour laquelle le programme
a bnfci de lagrment. Une telle situation peut se
produire si ltablissement a cess dofrir le programme
sous ce nom particulier, si lagrment est arriv son terme
sans que ltablissement en demande le renouvellement,
ou encore si le Bureau dagrment a refus daccorder ce
renouvellement.
e) Si une troisime date apparat, celle-ci indique le
renouvellement de lagrment partir de cette anne-l,
aprs un intervalle.
Accredited engineering
programs by institution
Notes:
a) Tis listing of accredited programs includes only
engineering programs which lead to a bachelors degree.
b) Institutions listed have voluntarily requested that
specifc engineering programs be evaluated by the
Accreditation Board. Te terminology requested by
the institution is shown.
c) A single date which follows the name of a program
indicates the year of the frst graduating class for which
accreditation applies. It also applies to subsequent years
and is still in force.
d) A double date following the name of a program
indicates the period (inclusive of both years) for
which the program was accredited. Tis may occur
if the institution has discontinued the program under
that specifc name or has not requested renewal of
accreditation or if the Accreditation Board has denied
such renewal.

e) Te appearance of a third date indicates that accredita-
tion has been renewed from that particular year on,
after a time interval.

Programmes de gnie agrs par tablissement Accredited engineering programs by institution
Alberta, University of
Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2G8
Agricultural Engg: 1983-1995.
Chemical Engg: 1965-
Civil Engg: 1965-
Computer Engg: 1983-
Electrical Engg: 1965-
Engineering Physics: 1988-
Materials Engg: 1999-
Mechanical Engg: 1965-
Metallurgical Engg: 1965-2000.
Mineral Engg: 1976-1982.
Mineral Process Engg: 1983-1991.
Mining Engg: 1965-1975, 1983-
Petroleum Engg: 1978-
British Columbia Institute
of Technology
Burnaby, British Columbia
School of Construction and
the Environment
Civil Engg: 2010-
School of Energy
British Columbia, The University of
Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z4
Faculty of Applied Science
Bio-Resource Engg: 1979-2001.
Chemical and Biological Engg: 2003-
Civil Engg: 1965-
Environmental Engg (jointly with
Northern British Columbia): 2007-
Geological Engg: 1965-
Integrated Engg: 2003-
Metals and Materials Engg: 1988-2005.
Mineral Engg: 1965-1979.
Mining and Mineral Process Engg: 1980-2005.
Mining Engg: 2004-
British Columbia-Okanagan,
The University of
Kelowna, British Columbia
Civil Engg: 2010-
Calgary, University of
Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4
Schulich School of Engineering
Civil Engg: 1969-
Geomatics Engg: 1996-
Manufacturing Engg: 1997-
Oil and Gas Engg: 2001-
Software Engg: 2002-
Surveying Engg: 1982-1997.
Carleton University
Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6
Faculty of Engineering and Design
Aerospace Engg: 1992-
Biomedical and Electrical Engg: 2010-
Biomedical and Mechanical Engg: 2012-
Civil Engg: 1965-
Communications Engg: 2002-
Computer Systems Engg: 1984-
Environmental Engg: 1996-
Sustainable and Renewable Energy Engg: 2012-
Concordia University
Montral, Qubec H3G 1M8
(formerly/auparavant
Sir George Williams University, 1959-1974)
Faculty of Engineering and
Computer Science
Building Engg: 1982-
Civil Engg: 1969-
Industrial Engg: 1995-
Conestoga College Institute of
Technology and Advanced Learning
Kitchener, Ontario N2G 4M4
School of Engineering and
Information Technology
Mechanical Systems Engg: 2010-
Dalhousie University
Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 2X4
(formerly/auparavant Dal Tech, 1997-2000 and/
et Technical University of Nova Scotia, 1981-1997
and/et Nova Scotia Technical College, 1907-1980)
Biological Engg: 1997-
Civil Engg: 1965-
Engineering Physics: 1987-1991.
Metallurgical Engg: 1965-1977, 1981-2005.
Mineral Resources Engg: 2007-
Mining Engg: 1965-2006.
cole de technologie suprieure
Montral, Qubec H2T 2C8
(affiliated with / affilie lUniversit du Qubec)
Gnie de la construction : 1993-
Gnie des oprations et de la logistique : 2008-
Gnie des technologies de linformation : 2006-
Gnie et gestion de la construction : 1990-1996.
Gnie lectrique : 1990-
Gnie logiciel : 2004-
Gnie mcanique : 1990-
Gnie de la production automatise : 1990-
Guelph, University of
Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
Biological Engg: 1973-
Engineering Systems and Computing: 1994-
Food Engg: 1993-2000.
Water Resources Engg: 1973-
Lakehead University
Thunder Bay, Ontario P7B 5E1
Civil Engg: 1974-
Laurentian University
Sudbury, Ontario P3E 2C6
Extractive Metallurgical Engg: 1987-2006.
Extractive Metallurgy: 1985-1986.
Mining Engg: 1987-
33
Laval, Universit
Qubec, Qubec G1K 7P4
Facult de foresterie, de gographie
et de gomatique
Gnie du bois : 2002-
Gnie gomatique : 2007-
Facult des sciences de lagriculture
et de lalimentation
Gnie agroenvironnemental : 2002-
Gnie alimentaire : 1997-
Facult des sciences et de gnie
Gnie chimique : 1965-
Gnie civil : 1965-
Gnie des eaux : 2009-
Gnie gologique : 1965-
Gnie informatique : 1993-
Gnie des matriaux et de la mtallurgie : 1990-
Gnie mtallurgique : 1965-1990.
Gnie des mines et de la minralurgie : 1990-
Gnie minier : 1965-1990.
Gnie physique : 1965-
Gnie rural : 1973-2002.
Manitoba, The University of
Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N2
Biosystems Engg: 1996-
Civil Engg: 1965-
Geological Engg: 1965-2001.
Industrial Engg: 1987-2005.
Manufacturing Engg: 2003-2013.
McGill University
Montral, Qubec H3A 2K6
Faculty of Agricultural and
Environmental Sciences
Bioresource Engg: 2005-
Agricultural Engg (Macdonald College):
1971-2006.
Civil Engg: 1965-
Mining Engg: 1965-
McMaster University*
Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4L7
Ceramic Engg: 1974-1998.
Chemical Engg & Bioengineering: 2006-
Civil Engg: 1989-
Civil Engg and Computer Systems: 1992-1995.
Civil Engg and Engg Mechanics: 1965-1988.
Electrical & Biomedical Engg: 2006-
Manufacturing Engg: 1982-2005.
Mechatronics Engg: 2009-
*Graduates of programs at this institution may
have completed additional non-technical studies,
such as a management or society option, that will
be listed on their transcripts. These transcripts
contain wording such as (Discipline) Engineering
and Management or (Discipline) Engineering and
Society. Only the engineering component of these
programs is accredited by the Canadian Engineering
Accreditation Board; thus, even though these options
meet the accreditation requirements, only the base
engineering programs are listed here.
*Il se peut que les diplms des programmes
de cet tablissement aient effectu des tudes
supplmentaires non techniques, comme loffrent
par exemple les options gestion ou socit, qui
seront libelles sur leur relev de notes de la
faon suivante : (Discipline) Engineering and
Management ou (Discipline) Engineering and
Society . Seule la composante gnie de ces
programmes est agre par le Bureau canadien
dagrment des programmes de gnie. Par
consquent, bien que ces options rpondent
aux exigences en matire dagrment, seuls les
programmes de base en gnie sont numrs
dans le prsent document.
Memorial University of
Newfoundland
St. Johns, Newfoundland A1B 3X5
Applied Science
Civil Engg: 1975-
Naval Architectural Engg: 1986-1996.
Ocean and Naval Architectural Engg: 1997-
Process Engg: 2013-
Shipbuilding Engg: 1982-1985.
Moncton, Universit de
Moncton, Nouveau-Brunswick E1A 3E9
Facult dingnierie
Gnie civil : 1972-
Gnie industriel : 1975-2009.
New Brunswick, University of
Fredericton, New Brunswick E3B 5A3
Faculty of Computer Science
and Faculty of Engineering
Civil Engg: 1965-
Forest Engg: 1972-
Surveying Engg: 1972-1999.
Northern British Columbia,
University of
Prince George, British Columbia V2N 4Z9
College of Science and Management
Environmental Engg (jointly with
British Columbia): 2007-
Nova Scotia Technical College
(see/voir Dalhousie University)
NSTC offered accredited engineering
programs from 1965 to 1980.
NSTC a offert des programmes de gnie agrs
de 1965 1980.
Nova Scotia, Technical University of
(see/voir Dalhousie University)
TUNS offered accredited engineering programs from
1981 to 1996. However, students who enrolled prior
to April 1, 1997, and graduated after that date can
request that their degree be in the name of TUNS.
TUNS a offert des programmes de gnie agrs de
1981 1996 mais les tudiants qui se sont inscrits
avant le 1
er
avril 1997 et qui ont obtenu leur diplme
aprs cette date peuvent demander que leur
diplme porte le nom de TUNS.

Ontario Institute of
Technology, University of*
Oshawa, Ontario L1H 7K4
Applied Science
Automotive Engg: 2009-
Manufacturing Engg: 2007-
Faculty of Energy Systems and
Nuclear Science
Nuclear Engg: 2007-
*Graduates of programs at this institution
may have completed additional non-technical
studies, such as a management option, that will
be listed on their degrees and transcripts. These
degrees and transcripts contain wording such
as (Discipline) Engineering and Management.
Only the engineering component of these
programs is accredited by the Canadian
Engineering Accreditation Board; thus, even
though these options meet the accreditation
requirements, only the base engineering
programs are listed here.
*Il se peut que les diplms des programmes
de cet tablissement aient effectu des tudes
supplmentaires non techniques, comme loffre
par exemple loption gestion, qui sera libelle
sur leur diplme et leur relev de notes de la
faon suivante : (Discipline) Engineering and
Management . Seule la composante gnie de
ces programmes est agre par le Bureau canadien
dagrment des programmes de gnie. Par
consquent, bien que ces options rpondent
aux exigences en matire dagrment, seuls les
programmes de base en gnie sont numrs
dans le prsent document.
Ottawa, University of
Ottawa, Ontario K1N 6N5
Biomedical Mechanical Engg: 2009-
Civil Engg: 1971-
Polytechnique, cole
Montral, Qubec H3C 3A7
(affiliated with / affilie lUniversit de Montral)
Gnie arospatial : 2012-
Gnie biomdical : 2012-
Gnie civil : 1965-
Gnie industriel : 1973-
Gnie des matriaux : 1990-2012.
Gnie mtallurgique : 1965-1989.
Gnie des mines : 1991-
Gnie minier : 1965-1991.
Gnie physique : 1965-
Qubec en Abitibi-Tmiscamingue,
Universit du
Rouyn-Noranda, Qubec J9X 5E4
Unit denseignement et de recherche
en sciences appliques
Gnie lectromcanique : 2000-
Qubec Chicoutimi, Universit du
Chicoutimi, Qubec G7H 2B1
Dpartement des sciences appliques
Gnie civil : 2012-
Gnie unifi : 1981-2009.
Ingnierie de laluminium : 2008-2012.
Qubec Montral, Universit du
Montral, Qubec H3C 3P8
Facult des sciences
Gnie microlectronique : 2007-
Qubec en Outaouais, Universit du
Gatineau, Qubec J8X 3X7
(formerly/auparavant Qubec Hull, Universit du)
Module de lingnierie
Qubec Rimouski, Universit du
Rimouski, Qubec G5L 3A1
Module de gnie
Gnie des systmes lectromcaniques : 1998-
Qubec Trois-Rivires,
Universit du
Trois-Rivires, Qubec G9A 5H7
cole dingnierie
Gnie mcanique manufacturier : 1987-1999.
Queens University
Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6
Applied Science
Civil Engg: 1965-
Engineering Chemistry: 1979-
Materials and Metallurgical Engg: 1992-2002.
Mathematics and Engineering: 1974-
Mining Engg: 1965-
Regina, University of
Regina, Saskatchewan S4S 0A2
Applied Science
Electronic Information Systems Engg:
1986-1994.
Electronic Systems Engg: 1995-
Environmental Systems Engg: 1997-
Industrial Systems Engg: 1984-
Petroleum Systems Engg: 2003-
Regional Environmental Systems Engg:
1990-1997.
Regional Systems Engg: 1984-1989.
Software Systems Engg: 2007-
Systems Engg: 1981-1983.
Royal Military College of Canada
Kingston, Ontario K7K 5L0
Aeronautical Engg: 2009-
Chemical Engg: 1965-1981, 2001-
Chemical and Materials Engg: 1992-2001.
Civil Engg: 1965-
Engineering and Management: 1972-1995.
Engineering Physics: 1975-1995.
Fuels and Materials Engg: 1982-1991.
35
Accredited engineering programs by institution Programmes de gnie agrs par tablissement
Ryerson Polytechnical Institute
(see/voir Ryerson University)
RPI offered accredited engineering programs in 1992.
RPI a offert des programmes de gnie agrs en 1992.
Ryerson Polytechnic University (RPU)
(see/voir Ryerson University)
RPU offered accredited engineering programs
from 1992 to 2002.
RPU a offert des programmes de gnie agrs
de 1992 2002.
Ryerson University
Toronto, Ontario M5B 2K3
(formerly/auparavant Ryerson Polytechnical Institute,
1964-1992, and Ryerson Polytechnic University,
1992-2002)
Architectural Science
Aerospace Engg: 1992-
Biomedical Engg: 2012-
Civil Engg: 1992-
Saskatchewan, University of
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 0W0
College of Engineering
Agricultural and Bioresource Engg: 1992-
Civil Engg: 1965-
Geological Engg (Geophysics): 1975-1999.
Mining Engg: 1974-1976.
Sherbrooke, Universit de
Sherbrooke, Qubec J1K 2R1
Facult de gnie
Gnie biotechnologique : 2008-
Gnie civil : 1965-
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, British Columbia V5A 1S6
School of Engineering Science
Engineering Science: 1986-
Mechatronic Systems Engg: 2011-
Sir George Williams University (SGW)
(see/voir Concordia University)
SGW offered accredited engineering programs
from 1969 to 1974.
SGW a offert des programmes de gnie agrs
de 1969 1974.
Toronto, University of
Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A4
and Engineering
Civil Engg: 1965-
Engineering Science: 1965-
Geo-Engineering: 1983-1990.
Geological Engg and Applied Earth Science:
1975-1982.
Geological and Mineral Engg: 1991-1998.
Metallurgical Engg and Materials Science:
1986-1995.
Metallurgy & Materials Science: 1965-1985.
Mineral Engg: 1999-
Victoria, University of
Victoria, British Columbia V8W 2Y2
Waterloo, University of
Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1
Civil Engg: 1965-
Management Engg: 2012-
Mechatronics Engg: 2008-
Nanotechnology Engg: 2010-
Systems Design Engg: 1974-
Western Ontario, The University of
London, Ontario N6A 5B9
Chemical Engg: 1965-1971, 2007-
Chemical and Biochemical Engg: 1972-2006.
Civil Engg: 1965-
Green Process Engg: 2012-
Integrated Engg: 2001-
Materials Engg: 1968-1999.
Windsor, University of
Windsor, Ontario N9B 3P4
Chemical Engg: 1965-1990.
Civil Engg: 1965-
Engineering Materials: 1974-1991.
York University
Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3
Faculty of Science and Engineering
Space Engg: 2007-

Programmes de gnie agrs
par titre de programme
Voir les remarques explicatives la page 31.
Accredited engineering
programs by program title
See explanatory notes on page 31.
Aeronautical Engineering
Royal Military: 2009-
Carleton: 1992-
Ryerson: 1992-
Agricultural Engineering
(see/voir Gnie rural)
Alberta: 1983-1995.
British Columbia: 1965-1978.
Dalhousie: 1974-2000.
Guelph: 1973-1995.
Manitoba: 1971-1998.
McGill (Macdonald College): 1971-2006.
Saskatchewan: 1965-1992.
Agricultural and Bioresource
Engineering
Saskatchewan: 1992-
Automotive Engineering
Ontario Institute of Technology: 2009-
Biological Engineering
Dalhousie: 1997-
Guelph: 1973-
Biomedical Engineering
(see/voir Gnie biomdical)
Ryerson: 2012-
Biomedical and Electrical
Engineering
Carleton: 2010-
Biomedical and Mechanical
Engineering
Carleton: 2012-
Biomedical Mechanical Engineering
Ottawa: 2009-
Bioresource Engineering
McGill: 2005-
Bio-resource Engineering
Biosystems Engineering
Manitoba: 1996-
Building Engineering
Concordia: 1982-
Ceramic Engineering
McMaster: 1974-1998.
Chemical and Biochemical
Engineering
Western Ontario: 1972-2006.
Chemical and Biological Engineering
British Columbia: 2003-
Chemical and Materials Engineering
Royal Military: 1992-2001.
Chemical Engineering
(see/voir Gnie chimique)
Alberta: 1965-
Calgary: 1969-
Dalhousie: 1965-
Lakehead: 1974-
Laurentian: 2006-
McGill: 1965-
McMaster: 1965-
New Brunswick: 1965-
Ottawa: 1965-
Queens: 1965-
Royal Military: 1965-1981, 2001-
Ryerson: 1992-
Saskatchewan: 1965-
Toronto: 1965-
Waterloo: 1965-
Western Ontario: 1965-1971, 2007-
Windsor: 1965-1990.
Chemical Engineering &
Bioengineering
McMaster: 2006-
Civil Engineering
(see/voir Gnie civil)
Alberta: 1965-
British Columbia Institute of Technology : 2010-
British Columbia - Okanagan: 2010-
Calgary: 1969-
Carleton: 1965-
Concordia: 1969-
Dalhousie: 1965-
Lakehead: 1974-
Manitoba: 1965-
McGill: 1965-
McMaster: 1989-
Memorial: 1975-
Ottawa: 1971-
Queens: 1965-
Ryerson: 1992-
Saskatchewan: 1965-
Toronto: 1965-
Waterloo: 1965-
Western Ontario: 1965-
Windsor: 1965-
Civil Engineering and
Computer Systems
Civil Engineering and
Engineering Mechanics
Communications Engineering
Carleton: 2002-
Computer Engineering
(see/voir Gnie informatique)
Alberta: 1983-
Calgary: 2002-
Concordia: 1983-
Dalhousie: 2006-
Manitoba: 1987-
McGill: 1993-
McMaster: 1981-
Memorial: 2002-
Ottawa: 1990-
Queens: 2002-
Ryerson: 2006-
Saskatchewan: 2009-
Toronto: 1994-
Victoria: 1988-
Waterloo: 1989-
York: 2007-
Computer Systems Engineering
Carleton: 1984-
Electrical & Biomedical Engineering
McMaster: 2006-
37

Programmes de gnie agrs par titre de programme Accredited engineering programs by program title
Electrical Engineering
(see/voir Gnie lectrique)
Alberta: 1965-
British Columbia Institute of Technology: 2011-
Calgary: 1969-
Carleton: 1965-
Concordia: 1969-
Dalhousie: 1965-
Lakehead: 1974-
Manitoba: 1965-
McGill: 1965-
McMaster: 1965-
Memorial: 1975-
Ottawa: 1965-
Queens: 1965-
Ryerson: 1992-
Saskatchewan: 1965-
Toronto: 1965-
Victoria: 1988-
Waterloo: 1965-
Windsor: 1965-
Electronic Information Systems
Engineering
Regina: 1986-1994.
Electronic Systems Engineering
Regina: 1995-
Engineering Chemistry
Queens: 1979-
Engineering and Management
Engineering Materials
Windsor: 1974-1991.
Engineering Physics
(see/voir Gnie physique)
Alberta: 1988-
Carleton: 2003-
McMaster: 1974-
Queens: 1965-
Saskatchewan: 1965-
Engineering Science
Simon Fraser: 1986-
Toronto: 1965-
Engineering Systems and Computing
Guelph: 1994-
Environmental Engineering
British Columbia (jointly with Northern
Carleton: 1996-
Dalhousie: 2006-
Guelph: 1993-
Northern British Columbia (jointly with
Saskatchewan: 2011-
Waterloo: 1999-
Windsor: 1991-
Environmental Systems Engineering
Regina: 1997-
Extractive Metallurgical Engineering
Laurentian: 1987-2006.
Extractive Metallurgy
Laurentian: 1985-1986.
Food Engineering
(see/voir Gnie alimentaire)
Guelph: 1993-2000.
Forest Engineering
Fuels and Materials Engineering
Gnie arospatial
(voir/see Aerospace Engineering)
Polytechnique: 2012-
Gnie agroenvironnemental
Laval: 2002-
Gnie alimentaire
(voir/see Food Engineering)
Laval: 1997-
Gnie biotechnologique
Sherbrooke: 2008-
Gnie biomdical
(voir/see Biomedical Engineering)
Gnie du bois
Laval: 2002-
Gnie chimique
(voir/see Chemical Engineering)
Laval: 1965-
Qubec Trois-Rivires: 1990-
Sherbrooke: 1973-
Gnie civil
(voir/see Civil Engineering)
Laval: 1965-
Moncton: 1972-
Qubec Chicoutimi: 2012-
Sherbrooke: 1965-
Gnie de la construction
cole de technologie suprieure: 1993-
Gnie des eaux
Laval: 2009-
Gnie des oprations et
de la logistique
Gnie des technologies de
linformation
Gnie lectrique
(voir/see Electrical Engineering)
Laval: 1965-
Moncton: 1998-
Qubec Rimouski: 2009-
Sherbrooke: 1965-
Gnie lectromcanique
Qubec en Abitibi-Tmiscamingue: 2000-
Gnie et gestion de la construction
cole de technologie suprieure: 1990-1996.
Gnie gomatique
(voir/see Geomatics Engineering)
Laval: 2007-
Gnie gologique
(voir/see Geological Engineering)
Laval: 1965-
Gnie industriel
(voir/see Industrial Engineering)
Moncton: 1975-2009.

Gnie informatique
(voir/see Computer Engineering)
Laval: 1993-
Qubec en Outaouais: 2002-
Sherbrooke: 1997-
Gnie logiciel
(voir/see Software Engineering)
Laval: 2006-
Gnie des matriaux
(voir/see Materials Engineering)
Polytechnique: 1990-2012.
Gnie des matriaux et
de la mtallurgie
(voir/see Materials and Metallurgical Engineering)
Laval: 1990-
Gnie mcanique
(voir/see Mechanical Engineering)
Laval: 1965-
Moncton: 1990-
Qubec en Abitibi-Tmiscamingue: 2010-
Sherbrooke: 1965-
Gnie mcanique manufacturier
Qubec Trois-Rivires: 1987-1999.
Gnie mtallurgique
(voir/see Metallurgical Engineering)
Laval: 1965-1990.
Gnie microlectronique
Qubec Montral: 2007-
Gnie des mines
Gnie des mines et de
la minralurgie
Laval: 1990-
Gnie minier
(voir/see Mining Engineering)
Laval: 1965-1990.
Gnie physique
(voir/see Engineering Physics)
Laval: 1965-
Gnie de la production automatise
Gnie rural
(voir/see Agricultural Engineering)
Laval: 1973-2002.
Gnie des systmes
lectromcaniques
Gnie unifi
(voir/see Integrated Engineering)
Qubec Chicoutimi: 1981-2009.
Geo-Engineering
Toronto: 1983-1990.
Geological and Mineral Engineering
Toronto: 1991-1998.
Geological Engineering
(see/voir Gnie gologique)
Queens: 1975-
Saskatchewan: 1965-
Toronto: 1965-1974.
Waterloo: 1986-
Windsor: 1972-1989.
Geological Engineering (Geophysics)
Geological Engineering and
Applied Earth Science
Toronto: 1975-1982.
Geomatics Engineering
(see/voir Gnie gomatique)
Calgary: 1996-
York: 2007-
Industrial Engineering
(see/voir Gnie industriel)
Concordia: 1995-
Dalhousie: 1969-
Ryerson: 1992-
Toronto: 1965-
Windsor: 1974-
Industrial Systems Engineering
Regina: 1984-
Ingnierie de laluminium
Qubec Chicoutimi: 2008-2012.
Integrated Engineering
(see/voir Gnie unifi)
Management Engineering
Waterloo: 2012-
Manufacturing Engineering
Calgary: 1997-
Materials and Metallurgical
Engineering
(see/voir Gnie des matriaux et de la mtallurgie)
Queens: 1992-2002.
Materials Engineering
(see/voir Gnie des matriaux)
Alberta: 1999-
Dalhousie: 2005-
McGill: 2005-
McMaster: 1990-
Toronto: 1996-
Western Ontario: 1968-1999.
Mathematics and Engineering
Queens: 1974-
Mechanical Engineering
(see/voir Gnie mcanique)
Alberta: 1965-
Calgary: 1969-
Carleton: 1965-
Concordia: 1969-
Dalhousie: 1965-
Guelph : 2013-
Lakehead: 1974-
Laurentian: 2011-
Manitoba: 1965-
McGill: 1965-
McMaster: 1965-
Memorial: 1975-
Ottawa: 1971-
Queens: 1965-
Ryerson: 1992-
39
Saskatchewan: 1965-
Toronto: 1965-
Victoria: 1992-
Waterloo: 1965-
Windsor: 1965-
Mechanical Systems Engineering
Conestoga: 2010-
Mechatronic Systems Engineering
Simon Fraser: 2011-
Mechatronics Engineering
Waterloo: 2008-
McMaster: 2009-
Metallurgical Engineering
(see/voir Gnie mtallurgique)
Alberta: 1965-2000.
Dalhousie: 1965-1977, 1981-2005.
McGill: 1965-2007.
Queens: 1965-1991.
Metallurgical Engineering and
Materials Science
Toronto: 1986-1995.
Metallurgy and Materials Science
Toronto: 1965-1985.
Metals and Materials Engineering
Mineral Engineering
Alberta: 1976-1982.
Toronto: 1999-
Mineral Resources Engineering
Dalhousie: 2007-
Mineral Process Engineering
Alberta: 1983-1991.
Mining and Mineral Process
Engineering
Mining Engineering
(see/voir Gnie minier)
Alberta: 1965-1975, 1983-
Laurentian: 1987-
McGill: 1965-
Queens: 1965-
Nanotechnology Engineering
Waterloo: 2010-
Naval Architectural Engineering
Memorial: 1986-1996.
Nuclear Engineering
Ocean and Naval Architectural
Engineering
Memorial: 1997-
Oil and Gas Engineering
Calgary: 2001-
Petroleum Engineering
Alberta: 1978-
Petroleum Systems Engineering
Regina: 2003-
Process Engineering
Memorial: 2013-
Regional Systems Engineering
Regina: 1984-1989.
Regional Environmental
Systems Engineering
Regina: 1990-1997.
Shipbuilding Engineering
Memorial: 1982-1985.
Software Engineering
(see/voir Gnie logiciel)
Calgary: 2002-
Carleton: 2003-
Concordia: 2002-
Lakehead: 2002-
McGill: 2007-
McMaster: 2001-
Ottawa: 2001-
Victoria: 2007-
Waterloo: 2006-
Software Systems Engineering
Regina: 2007-
Space Engineering
York: 2007-
Surveying Engineering
Calgary: 1982-1997.
New Brunswick: 1972-1999.
Sustainable and Renewable
Energy Engineering
Carleton: 2012-
Systems Design Engineering
Waterloo: 1974-
Systems Engineering
Regina: 1981-1983.
Water Resources Engineering
Guelph: 1973-

Programmes substantiellement
quivalents
En 1997, Ingnieurs Canada a largi le mandat du Bureau
canadien dagrment des programmes de gnie afn quil
comprenne lvaluation des programmes de gnie en dehors
du Canada. Ces valuations sont efectues en conformit
avec les politiques et pratiques du Bureau dagrment et
peuvent aboutir une dcision dquivalence substantielle
lgard des programmes oferts par les tablissements
trangers. Comme lagrment accord par le Bureau
dagrment vise procurer aux diplms une formation
rpondant aux exigences de formation universitaire pour
ladmission la profession au Canada, le Bureau dagrment
nutilise le terme agrment que pour les programmes
oferts au Canada. Les valuations efectues en dehors
du Canada sont par consquent appeles des valuations
dquivalence substantielle.
Lexpression quivalence substantielle signife que
le contenu et lexprience ducationnelle dun programme
sont comparables et laisse entendre avec raisonnablement
de confance que les diplms de ce programme possdent
les titres de comptences requis pour commencer exercer
la profession au niveau dentre. Le Bureau dagrment
recommande aux ordres constituants dIngnieurs Canada
de traiter les diplms des programmes jugs substantielle-
ment quivalents comme des diplms de programmes
agrs par le Bureau dagrment, tant que lquivalence
substantielle est en vigueur.
Les procdures sappliquant aux valuations dquivalence
substantielle dIngnieurs Canada sont jointes ce document
lannexe 11.
Remarques :
Les tablissements denseignement numrs ont, de leur
propre chef, demand au Bureau dagrment dvaluer certains
de leurs programmes. La terminologie utilise est celle qui a
t choisie par ltablissement.
Lorsque le nom dun programme est suivi dune seule date,
cette date correspond lanne de la premire promotion
laquelle lquivalence substantielle sapplique. Lquivalence
substantielle sapplique galement aux annes subsquentes
et est toujours en vigueur.
Substantially equivalent
programs
In 1997, Engineers Canada expanded the Accreditation
Boards mandate to include evaluations of engineering
programs outside Canada. Tese evaluations follow
Accreditation Board policies and procedures and may
lead to a decision of substantial equivalency of programs
ofered by foreign institutions. Since Canadian Engineering
Accreditation Board accreditation is designed to provide
graduates with an education satisfying the academic
requirements for licensure as a professional engineer
within Canada, the Accreditation Board uses the
term accreditation only within Canada. Evaluations
conducted outside Canada are therefore called substantial
equivalency evaluations.

Substantial equivalency means comparable in program
content and educational experience and it implies reason-
able confdence that the graduates possess the academic
competencies needed to begin professional practice at the
entry level. Te Accreditation Board recommends that
Engineers Canadas constituent associations treat graduates
of programs evaluated as substantially equivalent like
graduates of Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board-
accredited programs for the period that substantial
equivalence is in efect.
Procedures for Engineers Canada substantial equivalency
evaluations are found in Appendix 11 to this document.
Notes:
Institutions listed have voluntarily requested that specifc
engineering programs be evaluated by the Accreditation
Board. Te terminology requested by the institution
is shown.
A single date which follows the name of a program
indicates the year of the frst graduating class for which
the equivalency applies. It also applies to subsequent years
and is still in force.
41
Lorsque le nom dun programme est suivi de deux dates,
ces dates correspondent la priode (y compris les deux
annes mentionnes) pour laquelle le programme a bnfci
de lquivalence substantielle. Une telle situation peut se
produire si ltablissement a cess dofrir le programme
sous ce nom particulier, si lquivalence substantielle est
arrive son terme sans que ltablissement en demande
le renouvellement, ou encore si le Bureau dagrment a
refus daccorder ce renouvellement.
Laccord intitul Reconnaissance de lquivalence de programmes
dingnierie accrdits menant au diplme dingnieur (aussi
connu sous le nom dAccord de Washington) sapplique
uniquement aux programmes des pays membres et, par
consquent, les programmes substantiellement quivalents
ne sont pas couverts par cet accord.
Universidad de Costa Rica
PO Box Universidad de Costa Rica
San Jos, Costa Rica
Gnie civil : 1999-
Seul le programme de cinq ans menant la Licenciatura
de lUniversidad de Costa Rica est jug comme tant
substantiellement quivalent.
Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Per
Av. Universitario
Cdra. 18 s/n, San Miguel
Prou
Gnie lectronique : 2008-
Seul le programme de cinq ans menant la dsignation
d Ingeniero de la Pontifcia Universidad Catlica del Per
est jug comme tant substantiellement quivalent.
A double date following the name of a program indicates
the period (inclusive of both years) for which the program
was judged to be substantially equivalent. Tis may occur
if the institution has discontinued the program under
that specifc name or has not requested renewal of the
equivalency or if the Accreditation Board has denied
such renewal.

Te agreement entitled Recognition of Equivalency of
Engineering Education Courses/Program Leading to the
Accredited Engineering Degree (also called the Washington
Accord) applies only to programs within the member
countries and, therefore, the substantially equivalent
programs do not fall under the agreement.
Universidad de Costa Rica
P.O. Box Universidad de Costa Rica
San Jos, Costa Rica
Civil Engineering: 1999-
Electrical Engineering: 2000-
Industrial Engineering: 2000-
Mechanical Engineering: 2008-
Only the fve-year program leading to the Licenciatura
from the Universidad de Costa Rica is judged substantially
equivalent.
Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Per
Av. Universitario
Cdra. 18 s/n, San Miguel
Per
Electronic Engineering: 2008-
Industrial Engineering: 2008-
Informatics Engineering: 2008-
Only the fve-year program leading to the Ingeniero
from the Pontifcia Universidad Catlica del Per is judged
substantially equivalent.

Instituto Tecnolgico de Costa Rica
Central Campus Cartago
Cartago, Costa Rica
Gnie agricole : 2013-
Gnie de la construction : 2001-
Gnie lectronique : 2004-
Gnie de la maintenance industrielle : 2001-
Gnie de la production industrielle : 2004-
Gnie des matriaux : 2010-
Seul le programme de cinq ans menant la Licenciatura
de lInstituto Tecnolgico de Costa Rica est jug comme
tant substantiellement quivalent.
Technische Universitt Graz
Kopernikusgasse 24
A-8010 Graz, Autriche
Gnie mcanique : 2001-2007.
Gnie mcanique - conomie : 2001-2007.
Seul le programme menant au grade de B.Eng. SE
de la Technische Universitt Graz a t jug comme tant
substantiellement quivalent.
Tomsk Polytechnic University
30, Lenin Avenue
Tomsk 634 050, Russie
Gnie informatique : 2005-2012.
Seul le programme menant au grade de diplme de
spcialiste de la Tomsk Polytechnic University est jug
comme tant substantiellement quivalent.
Instituto Tecnolgico de Costa Rica
Central Campus Cartago
Cartago, Costa Rica
Agricultural Engineering: 2013 -
Construction Engineering: 2001-
Electronic Engineering: 2004-
Industrial Maintenance Engineering: 2001-
Industrial Production Engineering: 2004-
Materials Engineering: 2010-
Only the fve-year program leading to the Licenciatura
from the Instituto Tecnolgico de Costa Rica is judged
Technische Universitt Graz
Kopernikusgasse 24
A-8010 Graz, Austria
Mechanical Engineering: 2001-2007.
Mechanical Engineering-Economics: 2001-2007.
Only the program leading to the B.Eng. SE degree from
the Technische Universitt Graz was judged substantially
equivalent.
Tomsk Polytechnic University
30, Lenin Avenue
Tomsk 634 050, Russia
Computer Engineering: 2005-2012.
Only the fve-year program leading to the diploma of
specialist from Tomsk Polytechnic University is judged
43
Accords internationaux de
reconnaissance mutuelle
Par lintermdiaire de son Comit international, Ingnieurs
Canada vise faire reconnatre par la communaut inter-
nationale les normes dexcellence canadiennes pour
lenseignement et la pratique du gnie. Lorsquil y a lieu,
Ingnieurs Canada conclut avec dautres organisations des
accords de reconnaissance mutuelle des systmes dagrment
ou des titres de comptences en gnie. Le Bureau canadien
dagrment des programmes de gnie participe ce processus
en vrifant lquivalence des systmes dagrment dautres
pays pour dterminer sils sont acceptables et en valuant,
sur demande, des programmes de formation en gnie de pays
trangers la lumire des politiques et des procdures du
Bureau dagrment.
Deux accords actuellement en vigueur reconnaissent que les
systmes dagrment utiliss par le Bureau dagrment et lautre
partie pour valuer les programmes menant un diplme de
gnie sont substantiellement quivalents et que les programmes
agrs des deux parties satisfont aux exigences de formation
requises pour lexercice du gnie au niveau professionnel.
Par consquent, les signataires conviennent que leurs
normes, leurs politiques et leurs procdures respectives
en matire dagrment des programmes de gnie sont
comparables et que les dcisions dagrment rendues par
un signataire sont acceptables pour les autres signataires,
ce quils confrmeront en publiant des dclarations cet
efet de manire pertinente.
En 1980, le Bureau dagrment dIngnieurs Canada
a sign le premier de ces accords de reconnaissance mutuelle
avec lEngineering Accreditation Commission de lABET
des tats-Unis. Les deux parties ont mis jour et ratif cet
accord au cours des annes 1996 et 1997. Laccord sapplique
aux diplms de tous les programmes agrs par lEngineering
Accreditation Commission de lABET.
Accord de Washington
En 1989, des reprsentants dorganisations dingnieurs
de six pays ont sign le deuxime de ces accords, intitul
Reconnaissance de lquivalence de programmes dingnierie
accrdits menant au diplme dingnieur.
International mutual
recognition agreements
Engineers Canada, through its International Committee,
strives to achieve recognition by the international
community of Canadian standards of excellence in
engineering education and practice. Where appropriate,
Engineers Canada will enter into agreements with other
organizations concerning mutual recognition of accredita-
tion systems or professional engineering qualifcations.
Te Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board assists
in this mission by ascertaining the equivalency and
acceptability of accreditation systems in other countries
and by evaluating, upon request, foreign engineering
education programs using Accreditation Board policies
and procedures.
Two agreements in force recognize that the systems of the
Accreditation Board and the other party for accreditation
of programs leading to a degree in engineering are substan-
tially equivalent and that the accredited programs of both
parties satisfy the academic requirements for the practice
of engineering at a professional level.
Accordingly, the signatories agree that the criteria,
policies and procedures used by the signatories in accredit-
ing engineering academic programs are comparable and
that the accreditation decisions rendered by one signatory
are acceptable to the other signatories, and that those
signatories will so indicate by publishing statements to
that efect in an appropriate manner.
Te frst of these agreements was signed in 1980 by
the Accreditation Board of Engineers Canada and the
Engineering Accreditation Commission of ABET of the
United States of America. Tis agreement was updated and
ratifed by both parties during the course of 1996 and 1997.
Te agreement is valid for graduates of all programs accredit-
ed by the Engineering Accreditation Commission of ABET.
The Washington Accord
Te second of these agreements, entitled Recognition of
Equivalency of Engineering Education Courses/Programs
Leading to the Accredited Engineering Degree, was signed in
1989 by representatives of engineering organizations from
six countries.

Les signataires de cet accord, maintenant appel
Accord de Washington , taient :
Canada : Bureau canadien dagrment des programmes
de gnie dIngnieurs Canada
Australie : Engineers Australia
Irlande : Engineers Ireland
Nouvelle-Zlande : Te Institution of Professional Engineers
New Zealand
Royaume-Uni : Te Engineering Council UK
tats-Unis : Engineering Accreditation Commission
de lABET
Aprs que le Bureau dagrment eut men une srie
dactivits de vrifcation, Ingnieurs Canada a approuv
et ratif lAccord qui sapplique aux diplms de 1989 et
des annes subsquentes. Laccord conclu antrieurement
avec lABET des tats-Unis demeure en vigueur.
Afrique du Sud : En 1993, lEngineering Council of South
Africa a t accept titre de signataire de lAccord, sous
rserve de vrifcation satisfaisante. Le Bureau dagrment
a efectu sa vrifcation en 1999 et laccord sapplique aux
diplms de 1999 et des annes subsquentes.
Hong Kong : En 1995, la Hong Kong Institution of
Engineers a t accepte titre de signataire et, en 1996,
une fois la vrifcation faite par le Bureau dagrment,
Ingnieurs Canada a ratif laccord qui est rput sappliquer
aux diplms de 1995 et des annes subsquentes.
En 1997, lAccord a t rvis, en particulier sous laspect des
rgles et des procdures, sous rserve de ratifcation par chacun
des signataires. Ingnieurs Canada a ratif lAccord.
Japon : En 2005, le Japan Accreditation Board for
Engineering Education a t accept comme signataire
de lAccord. Ingnieurs Canada a ratif laccord qui est
rput sappliquer aux diplms de 2005 et des annes
subsquentes.
Singapour : En 2006, lInstitution of Engineers, Singapore a
t accept titre de signataire de lAccord. Ingnieurs Canada
a ratif laccord qui est rput sappliquer aux diplms de
2006 et des annes subsquentes.
Core : En 2007, lAccreditation Board for Engineering
Education of Korea a t accept titre de signataire
de lAccord. Ingnieurs Canada a ratif laccord qui
est rput sappliquer aux diplms de 2007 et des
annes subsquentes.
Te signatories to this agreement, referred to as the
Washington Accord, were:
Canada: Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board
of Engineers Canada
Australia: Engineers Australia
Ireland: Engineers Ireland
New Zealand: Te Institution of Professional Engineers
New Zealand
United Kingdom: Te Engineering Council
United States of America: Engineering Accreditation
Commission of ABET
Following a series of verifcation activities by the
Accreditation Board, this agreement was approved and
ratifed by Engineers Canada and is valid for graduates
from 1989 onward. Te earlier agreement with ABET
of the United States remains in force.
South Africa: In 1993, the Engineering Council of South
Africa was accepted, subject to satisfactory verifcation, as a
signatory to the Agreement. Te Accreditation Board com-
pleted its verifcation activities in 1999 and the agreement
is valid for candidates who have graduated since 1999.
Hong Kong: In 1995, the Hong Kong Institution of
Engineers was accepted as a signatory and after the
Accreditation Board completed its verifcation activities
in 1996, the agreement was ratifed by Engineers Canada
and is considered to be valid for candidates who have
graduated since 1995.
In 1997, the Agreement was revised, mostly with respect to
rules and procedures, subject to ratifcation by each of the
signatories. Engineers Canada ratifed the Agreement.
Japan: In 2005, the Japan Accreditation Board for
Engineering Education was accepted as a signatory to
the Washington Accord. Tat agreement was ratifed by
Engineers Canada and is considered to be valid for
candidates who have graduated since 2005.
Singapore: In 2006, the Institution of Engineers,
Singapore was accepted as a signatory to the Washington
Accord. Tat agreement was ratifed by Engineers Canada
and is considered to be valid for candidates who have
graduated since 2006.
Korea: In 2007, the Accreditation Board for Engineering
Education of Korea was accepted as a signatory to the
Washington Accord. Tat agreement was ratifed by
45
Taiwan (Taipei chinois) : En 2007, lInstitute of
Engineering Education Taiwan a t accept titre de
signataire de lAccord. Ingnieurs Canada a ratif laccord
qui est rput sappliquer aux diplms de 2007 et des
annes subsquentes.
Malaisie : En 2009, le Board of Engineering Malaysia a t
accept titre de signataire de lAccord. Ingnieurs Canada
a ratif laccord qui est rput sappliquer aux diplms de
2009 et des annes subsquentes.
Turquie : En 2011, MDEK a t accept titre de signataire
de lAccord. Ingnieurs Canada a ratif laccord qui est rput
sappliquer aux diplms de 2011 et des annes subsquentes.
Russie : En 2012, lAssociation for Engineering Education
of Russia a t accepte titre de signataire de lAccord.
Ingnieurs Canada a ratif laccord qui est rput sappliquer
aux diplms de 2012 et des annes subsquentes.
Secrtariat de lAccord de Washington
International Engineering Alliance
C/O Institution of Professional Engineers NZ
Secrtariat : Mme Margaret Dawson
Ground Floor, 158 Te Terrace
PO Box 12 241, Wellington 6144
Nouvelle-Zlande
Tl. : 011-64-4-473-2022
Tlc. : 011-64-4-474-8933
Courriel : secretariat@ieagreements.org
Web : www.ipenz.org.nz
Commission des Titres dIngnieur
France : En 1999, Ingnieurs Canada a conclu un accord
avec la Commission des Titres dIngnieur de France,
accord reconnaissant que les processus dagrment de la
Commission et du Bureau dagrment dIngnieurs Canada
sont substantiellement quivalents. Laccord permet de
reconnatre les ingnieurs canadiens comme des ingnieurs
diplms en France. Les ingnieurs diplms issus de
programmes reconnus par la Commission peuvent obtenir
un permis auprs dun ordre dingnieurs au Canada sans
devoir subir dexamens techniques. (Professional Engineers
Ontario ne layant pas mis en application, laccord avec la
France ne concerne pas les ingnieurs inscrits en Ontario.)
Taiwan (Chinese Taipei): In 2007, the Institute of
Engineering Education Taiwan was accepted as a signatory
to the Washington Accord. Tat agreement was ratifed by
Malaysia: In 2009, the Board of Engineering Malaysia
was accepted as a signatory to the Washington Accord.
Tat agreement was ratifed by Engineers Canada and is
considered to be valid for candidates who have graduated
since 2009.
Turkey: In 2011, MDEK was accepted as a signatory of
the Washington Accord. Tis agreement was ratifed by
Engineers Canada and is considered valid for graduates
who have graduated since 2011.
Russia: In 2012, Te Association for Engineering
Education of Russia was accepted as a signatory of the
Washington Accord. Tis agreement was ratifed by
Engineers Canada and is considered valid for graduates
who have graduated since 2012.
Washington Accord Secretariat
International Engineering Alliance
C/O Institution of Professional Engineers NZ
Secretariat: Mrs Margaret Dawson
Ground Floor, 158 Te Terrace
PO Box 12 241, Wellington 6144
New Zealand
Tel: 011-64-4-473-2022
Fax: 011-64-4-474-8933
E-Mail: secretariat@ieagreements.org
Web: www.ipenz.org.nz
Commission des Titres dIngnieur
France: In 1999, Engineers Canada concluded an
agreement with la Commission des Titres dIngnieur
which considers that the accreditation processes used
by la Commission and the Accreditation Board of
Engineers Canada are substantially equivalent. Te
agreement enables recognition of Canadian professional
engineers as ingnieurs diploms in France. Ingnieurs
diploms who are graduates of programs recognized by
la Commission, are granted access to the Canadian
engineering associations or ordre without having to pass
technical examinations. (Professional Engineers Ontario
has not implemented the agreement, so the agreement is
not in force for professional engineers licensed in Ontario.)

Organismes internationaux ayant sign avec
Ingnieurs Canada un accord de reconnaissance
mutuelle bas sur lagrment
On peut se procurer le texte des accords de reconnaissance
mutuelle : www.ingenieurscanada.ca/f/pr_mobility_1.cfm
International organizations with mutual
recognition agreements with Engineers Canada
Copies of the mutual recognition agreements may be
obtained from:
www.engineerscanada.ca/e/pr_mobility_1.cfm
ABET Inc.
Executive Director:
Michael Milligan, P.E
111 Market Place, Suite 1050
Baltimore, Maryland
21202-4012, U.S.
Tel: 410-347-7700
Fax: 410-625-2238
E-mail: international@abet.org
Web: www.abet.org
Engineering Council
of South Africa
Acting Chief Executive Officer:
Edgar Sabela
1st Floor, Waterview Corner Building
2 Ernest Oppenheimer Avenue
Bruma, Lake Park
Johannesburg, South Africa 2198
Tel: +27 11 607-9500
Fax: +27 11 622-9295
E-mail: ceo@ecsa.co.za
Web: www.ecsa.co.za
The Engineering
Council UK
Chief Executive Officer:
Jon Prichard, C.Eng.
246 High Holborn
London WC1V 7EX,
United Kingdom
Tel: 011-44-20-7357-6478
Fax: 011-44-20-7379-5586
Web: www.engc.org.uk
The Hong Kong Institution
of Engineers*
Chief Executive and Secretary:
Monica Yuen
9/F Island Beverley
No. 1 Great George Street
Causeway Bay, Hong Kong
Tel: 011-852-2895-4446
Fax: 011-852-2577-7791
E-mail: secretary@hkie.org.hk
Web: www.hkie.org.hk
Engineers Australia*
Chief Executive:
Stephen Durkin, CPEng
The Engineering House
11 National Circuit
Barton ACT 2600, Australia
Tel: 011-61-2-6270-6555
Fax: 011-61-2-6273-1488
E-mail: memberservices@
engineersaustralia.org.au
www.engineersaustralia.org.au
Engineers Ireland*
Director General: Mr. John Power
22 Clyde Road, Ballsbridge
Dublin 4, Ireland
Tel: 011-353-1-668-4341
Fax: 011-353-1-668-5508
E-mail: ipower@engineersireland.ie
Web: www.engineersireland.ie
Japan Accreditation
Board for Engineering
Education
Executive Managing
Director & Secretary General:
Dr. Yasuyuki Aoshima
Kenchiku Kaikan, 6 Floor
5-26-20, Shiba, Minato-ku
Tokyo 108-0014, Japan
Tel: 011-81-3-5439-5031
Fax: 011-81-3-5439-5033
E-mail: aoshima@jabee.org
Web: www.jabee.org
The Institution of
Professional Engineers
New Zealand
Chief Executive: Andrew C. Cleland
158 The Terrace
Wellington, 6011, New Zealand
Tel: 011-64-4-474-8935
Fax: 011-64-4-474-8933
E-mail: acleland@ipenz.org.nz
Web: www.ipenz.org.nz
Commission des Titres
dIngnieur
Prsident : Bernard Remaud
34 avenue Charles de Gaulle,
92200 Neuilly sur Seine France
Tl. : 011-33 1 41 92 36 19
Tlc.: 011-33 1 41 92 36 19
Courriel : secretariat@
cti-commission.fr
Web : www.cti-commission.fr
Institution of Engineers,
Singapore
Chairman: Mr. See-Ho ONG
Engineering Accreditation Board
70, Bukit Tinggi Road
Singapore - 289758
Tel: 011-(65) 6325 7494
Fax: 011-(65) 6467 1108
E-mail: ong_see_ho@bca.gov.sg
Web: www.ies.org.sg
Accreditation Board for
Engineering Education
of Korea
Chair, International Activities
Committee: Dr. Jung Soo Kim
17th floor, Korea Technology Center
305 Teheranno, Gangnam-gu
Seoul 135-080, Korea
Tel: 011 82 17 299 1471
Fax: 011 82 2 6009 4028
E-mail: apolllo11@hanmail.net
Web: www.abeek.or.kr
Institute of Engineering
Education Taiwan
Director: Andrew M. Wo
International Affairs Department
130, Sec 3, Keelung Road
Taipei 106, Taiwan, ROC
Tel: 011-886-2-2367-9506
Fax: 011-886-2-2367-9452
E-mail: andrew@ieet.org.tw
Web: www.ieet.org.tw
Board of Engineers
Malaysia
Executive Director:
Ir Ruslan Abdul Aziz
Lembaga Jurutera Malaysia
Tingkat 17, Ibu Pejabat JKR
Jalan Sultan Salahuddin
50580 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Tel: 011-603-2698 2413
Fax: 011-603-2692 5017
E-mail: secretary@bem.org.my
Web: www.bem.org.my
MDEK
Secretary General: Dr. Yavuz Eril
Zincirlidere Caddesi No. 86/4
Mericoglu Plaza
Esentepe, Sisli, 34394
Istanbul, Turkey
Tel: 90 212 211-0281
Fax: 90 212 211-0289
Association for
Engineering Education
of Russia
AEER Accreditation Center
Chair, Accreditation Board:
Dr. Alexander Chuchalin
30, Lenin Avenue, office #328
Tomsk, 634050
Russian Federation
Tel./Fax: +7 3822-563406
E-mail: chai@ac-raee.ru
* Engineers Canada has also
entered into professional level
agreements intended to facilitate
international mobility for licensed
engineers. Currently, Engineers
Canada has agreements with
Hong Kong, Australia and Ireland.
Additional details are available from
www.engineerscanada.ca
* Ingnieurs Canada a galement
conclu des ententes au niveau
professionnel destines faciliter
la mobilit des ingnieurs lchelle
internationale. A lheure actuelle,
Ingnieurs Canada a des ententes
avec Hong Kong, Australie et Irlande.
Dautres renseignements cet gard
son disponibles sur le site
www.ingenieurscanada.ca
47
Prsident(e)s, membres et
secrtairesde 1965 ce jour
Chairs, members and
secretaries1965 to date
Chairs/Prsident(e)s
P.P. Biringer, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 1965-68
C.A. Brockley, P.Eng. Vancouver, BC 1968-70
I.W. Smith, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 1970-72
R.M. Hardy, P.Eng. Edmonton, AB 1972-74
J.L. Corneille, ing. Montral, QC 1974-76
D.J. Clough, P.Eng. Waterloo, ON 1976-78
G. Ford, P.Eng. Edmonton, AB 1978-79
P. Grenier, ing. Qubec, QC 1979-80
G.A. Morris, FEC, P.Eng. Winnipeg, MB 1980-81
J.A.H. Lund, P.Eng. Vancouver, BC 1981-82
J. Delisle, ing. Sherbrooke, QC 1982-83
R.A. Robertson, P.Eng. St. Johns, NF 1983-84
G.R. Slemon, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 1984-85
G.R. Monforton, P.Eng. Windsor, ON 1985-86
G.E. Laliberte, FEC, P.Eng. Winnipeg, MB 1986-87
R.L. Papineau, FIC, ing. Montral, QC 1987-88
G.A. Simms, FEC, P.Eng. Edmonton, AB 1988-89
A. Meisen, FEC, P.Eng. Vancouver, BC 1989-90
A. Biron, FIC, ing. Montral, QC 1990-91
H.A.R. de Paiva, FEC, P.Eng. Calgary, AB 1991-92
R.C. Biggs, P.Eng. Ottawa, ON 1992-93
J.D. Aplevich, FEC, P.Eng. Waterloo, ON 1993-94
L. Quesnel, FIC, ing. Montral, QC 1994-95
L.T. Russell, FEC, P.Eng. Halifax, NS 1995-96
F.D. Otto, FEC, P.Eng. Edmonton, AB 1996-97
G.Y. Delisle, FIC, ing. Ste-Foy, QC 1997-98
R.M. Mathur, FEC, P.Eng. London, ON 1998-99
W.I. Hughes, FEC, P.Eng. Sechelt, BC 1999-00
E.R. Norris, FIC, Eng. Montral, QC 2000-01
W.G. Paterson, FEC, P.Eng. Fredericton, NB 2001-02
J.-Y. Chagnon, FIC, ing. Qubec, QC 2002-03
D.T. Lynch, FIC, P.Eng. Edmonton, AB 2003-05
D.W. Ruth, FEC, P.Eng. Winnipeg, MB 2005-07
G.R. Peters, FEC, P.Eng. St. Johns, NF 2007-09
J.OBrien, FEC, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 2009-11
Ren Rochette, FIC, ing. Trois-Rivires, QC 2011-12
M.J. Reeves, FEC, P.Eng. Saskatoon, SK 2012-
Members/Membres
P.P. Biringer, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 1965-69
C.A. Brockley, P.Eng. Vancouver, BC 1965-71
A. Dub, ing. Qubec, QC 1965-67
J.W. Gregg, P.Eng. Calgary, AB 1965-69
R.A. Johnson, P.Eng. Winnipeg, MB 1965-67
R.H.B. McLaughlin, P.Eng. Fredericton, NB 1965-68
L. Gendron, ing. Montral, QC 1967-70
J.B. Mantle, P.Eng. Regina, SK 1967-70
I.W. Smith, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 1967-73
G.G. Meyerhof, P.Eng. Halifax, NS 1968-71
R.M. Bartholomew, P.Eng. Vancouver, BC 1969-72
R.M. Hardy, P.Eng. Edmonton, AB 1969-75
J.L. Corneille, ing. Montral, QC 1970-77
P.A. Lapp, FEC, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 1970-74
A.B. Thornton-Trump, P.Eng. Winnipeg, MB 1970-73
A.M. Stevens, P.Eng. Fredericton, NB 1971-74
R.A. Ritter, P.Eng. Calgary, AB 1972-75
D.J. Clough, P.Eng. Waterloo, ON 1973-79
D.G. Olafson, P.Eng. Calgary, AB 1973-76
J.M. Ham, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 1974-77
J.C. Maguire, P.Eng. Lucknow, ON 1974-79
J.D. Smith, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 1974-77
G. Ford, P.Eng. Edmonton, AB 1975-80
E. Peters, P.Eng. Vancouver, BC 1975-78
P. Grenier, ing. Qubec, QC 1976-81
G.A. Morris, FEC, P.Eng. Winnipeg, MB 1976-82
A.A. Loiselle, ing. Montral, QC 1977-80
M. Pettigrew, FEC, P.Eng. Edmundston, NB 1977-80
J.H. Wade, P.Eng. Hamilton, ON 1977-80
P.R. Blanger, ing. Montral, QC 1978-81
J.A.H. Lund, FEC, P.Eng. Vancouver, BC 1978-83
M.J. Ozubko, P.Eng. Edmonton, AB 1978-81
J. Delisle, ing. Sherbrooke, QC 1979-84
E.J. Hinz, P.Eng. Saskatoon, SK 1979-82
G.R. Monforton, P.Eng. Windsor, ON 1980-87
G.V. Parkinson, P.Eng. Vancouver, BC 1980-83
R.A. Robertson, P.Eng. St. Johns, NF 1980-85
J.W. Rutter, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 1980-83

P.J. Carreau, ing. Montral, QC 1981-84
I.G. Finlay, P.Eng. Edmonton, AB 1981-84
G.R. Slemon, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 1981-86
G.E. Laliberte, FEC, P.Eng. Winnipeg, MB 1982-88
G.A. Simms, FEC, P.Eng. Edmonton, AB 1982-90
P.L. Bourgault, P.Eng. Ottawa, ON 1983-86
A. Meisen, FEC, P.Eng. Vancouver, BC 1983-91
R.L. Papineau, FIC, ing. Montral, QC 1983-89
A. Biron, FIC, ing. Montral, QC 1984-92
H.A.R. de Paiva, FEC, P.Eng. Calgary, AB 1984-93
W.J. Rainbird, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 1984-86
D. Angers, ing. Qubec, QC 1985-88
R. Masse, ing. Montral, QC 1985-89
J.D. Aplevich, FEC, P.Eng. Waterloo, ON 1986-95
R.C. Biggs, P.Eng. Ottawa, ON 1986-95
R.E. Burridge, FEC, P.Eng. Fredericton, NB 1986-89
R.R. Foster, P.Eng. Winnipeg, MB 1986-94
B.A. Young, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 1987-90
J.R. Grace, P.Eng. Vancouver, BC 1988-92
M. Sayer, P.Eng. Kingston, ON 1988-94
L. Quesnel, FIC, ing. Montral, QC 1989-96
L.T. Russell, FEC, P.Eng. Halifax, NS 1989-97
R. Thibault, ing. Sherbrooke, QC 1989-92
L.B. Halferdahl, P.Eng. Edmonton, AB 1990-96
F.D. Otto, FEC, P.Eng. Edmonton, AB 1990-98
G.Y. Delisle, FIC, ing. Ste-Foy, QC 1991-99
W.I. Hughes, FEC, P.Eng. Sechelt, BC 1992-01
R.M. Mathur, FEC, P.Eng. London, ON 1992-00
B. Szabados, FEC, P.Eng. Hamilton, ON 1992-01
E.R. Norris, FIC, Eng. Montral, QC 1993-02
M.A. Ball, FEC, P.Eng. Regina, SK 1994-97
W.G. Paterson, FEC, P.Eng. Fredericton, NB 1994-03
J.-Y. Chagnon, FIC, ing. Qubec, QC 1995-05
R.D. Venter, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 1995-01
D.T. Lynch, FEC, P.Eng. Edmonton, AB 1996-07
G. Turp, ing. Montral, QC 1996-98
D.W. Ruth, FEC, P.Eng. Winnipeg, MB 1997-09
J.H. Willings, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 1997-98
T.D. Vassos, FEC, P.Eng. Vancouver, BC 1998-02
N. El-Jabi, P.Eng. Moncton, NB 1998-01
E. Petriu, P.Eng. Ottawa, ON 1999-02
P. Pounienkow, ing. Hull, QC 1999-00
G.R. Peters, FEC, P.Eng. St. Johns, NF 2000-11
R.V. Barham, FEC, P. Eng. Calgary, AB 2000-06
L. Audy, ing. Trois-Rivires, QC 2001-03
R.M. Lepp, P.Eng. Petawawa, ON 2001-07
J.G. Locker, P.Eng. Thunder Bay, ON 2001-04
J.M. OBrien, FEC, P.Eng. Toronto, ON 2001-12
P.H. Alexander, FEC, P.Eng. Windsor, ON 2002-08
M.N. Danon-Schaffer, P.Eng. Vancouver, BC 2002-05
W. Pedrycz, FEC, P.Eng. Edmonton, AB 2002-11
K.C. Watts, P.Eng. Halifax, NS 2002-11
G. Lachiver, ing. Sherbrooke, QC 2003-
M.J. Reeves, FEC, P.Eng. Saskatoon, SK 2003-
R. Rochette, FIC, ing. Trois-Rivires, QC 2003-
M. Couturier, FEC, P. Eng. Fredericton, NB 2004-13
S. Brzev, P.Eng. Burnaby, BC 2005-11
W. MacQuarrie, FEC, P.Eng. Charlottetown, PE 2005-
P.R. Amyotte, FEC, P.Eng. Halifax, NS 2006-10
R. Hyde, P.Eng. Vancouver, BC 2007-13
R.J. Kind, FEC, P.Eng. Ottawa, ON 2007-
J.K.W. Lee, FEC, P.Eng. Kingston, ON 2008-13
G.Gendron, ing., P.Eng. Laval, QC 2009-
G. Reader, P.Eng. Windsor, ON 2010-
J. Blatz, FEC, P.Eng. Winnipeg, MB 2011-
D. Candido, FEC, P.Eng. Edmonton, AB 2011-
M. Isaacson, FEC, P.Eng. Vancouver, BC 2011-
J. Paynter, FEC, P.Eng. Fredericton, NB 2011-
N. Baaziz, ing. Gatineau, QC 2012-
P.G. Lafleur, ing. Montreal, QC 2013-
P. Klink, P.Eng. Kingston, ON 2013-
R. Dony, FEC, P.Eng. Guelph, ON 2013-
Secretaries/Secrtaires
L.M. Nadeau, P.Eng. (Acting) Ottawa, ON 1965-66
G.J. McGee, P.Eng. Ottawa, ON 1966-78
G.M. Matthews, P.Eng. Ottawa, ON 1978-92
S.W. Ryan-Bacon, P.Eng. Smiths Falls, ON 1993-98
D.A. Wolfe, FEC, P.Eng. Ottawa, ON 1998-09
G.Griffith, FEC, ing., P.Eng. Ottawa, ON 2009-
49
Constituent associations
of Engineers Canada
Ordres constituants
dIngnieurs Canada
The Association of Professional Engineers
and Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA)
1500 Scotia One, 10060 Jasper Avenue N.W.
Edmonton, AB T5J 4A2
CEO: Mark Flint, P.Eng.
Tel: 780-426-3990 / Fax: 780-424-6354
E-Mail: email@apega.ca / Web: www.apega.ca
Association of Professional Engineers and
Geoscientists of British Columbia (APEGBC)
200 4010 Regent Street
Burnaby, BC V5C 6N2
Chief Executive Officer & Registrar: Ann English, P.Eng.
Director, Registration: Gillian Pichler, FEC, P.Eng.
Tel: 604-430-8035 / Fax: 604-430-8085
E-Mail: apeginfo@apeg.bc.ca / Web: www.apeg.bc.ca
Association of Professional Engineers and
Geoscientists of the Province of Manitoba (APEGM)
870 Pembina Highway
Winnipeg, MB R3M 2M7
Executive Director and Registrar: Grant Koropatnick, P.Eng.
Tel: 204-474-2736 / Fax: 204-474-5960
E-Mail: apegm@apegm.mb.ca / Web: www.apegm.mb.ca
Engineers and Geoscientists New Brunswick
Ingnieurs et goscientifiques Nouveau-Brunswick
183 Hanwell Road
Fredericton, NB E3B 2R2
Chief Executive Officer: Andrew McLeod, FEC (Hon.)
Tel: 506-458-8083 / Fax: 506-451-9629
E-Mail: info@apegnb.com / Web: www.apegnb.com
Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of
Newfoundland and Labrador (PEGNL)
PO Box 21207
St. Johns, NF A1A 5B2
CEO and Registrar: Geoff Emberley, FEC, P.Eng.
Tel: 709-753-7714 / Fax: 709-753-6131
E-Mail: main@pegnl.ca / Web: www.pegnl.ca
Northwest Territories and Nunavut Association of
Professional Engineers & Geoscientists (NAPEG)
201, 4817 - 49th Street
Yellowknife, NT X1A 3S7
Executive Director & Registrar: Linda Golding, FEC (Hon.)
Tel: 867-920-4055 / Fax: 867-873-4058
E-Mail: napegg@tamarack.nt.ca / Web: www.napeg.nt.ca
Engineers Nova Scotia
PO Box 129
Halifax, NS B3J 2M4
CEO and Registrar: Len White, FEC, P.Eng.
Tel: 902-429-2250 / Fax: 902-423-9769
E-Mail: info@engineersnovascotia.ca / Web: www.engineersnovascotia.ca
Professional Engineers Ontario (PEO)
40 Sheppard Avenue West, Suite 101
Toronto, ON M2N 6K9
CEO and Registrar: TBA
Tel: 416-224-1100 / Fax 416-224-8168
E-Mail: webmaster@peo.on.ca / Web: www.peo.on.ca
Engineers PEI
135 Water Street
Charlottetown, PE C1A 1A8
Executive Director & Registrar: Jim Landrigan P.Eng.
Tel: 902-566-1268 / Fax: 902-566-5551
E-Mail: info@engineerspei.com / Web: www.engineerspei.com
Ordre des ingnieurs du Qubec (OIQ)
1100, avenue des Canadiens-de-Montral
Gare Windsor, Bureau 350
Montral, QC H3B 2S2
Directeur gnral : Andr Rainville, ing.
Tel: 514-845-6141 / Fax: 514-845-1833
E-Mail: dg@oiq.qc.ca / Web: www.oiq.qc.ca
Association of Professional Engineers &
Geoscientists of Saskatchewan (APEGS)
Suite 104 2255 13th Avenue
Regina, SK S4P 0V6
Executive Director & Registrar: Dennis Paddock, FEC, P.Eng.
Tel: 306-525-9547 / Fax: 306-525-0851
E-Mail: apegs@apegs.sk.ca / Web: www.apegs.sk.ca
Association of Professional Engineers of the Yukon (APEY)
312 B Hanson Street
Whitehorse, YT Y1A 1Y6
Executive Director: Laura Markle
Tel: 867-667-6727 / Fax: 867-668-2142
E-Mail: staff@apey.yk.ca / Web: www.apey.yk.ca
Appendices Annexes
Regulations for granting transfer credits 52 Rglements pour loctroi de crdits de transfert
Interpretive statement on natural sciences 60 nonc dinterprtation sur les sciences naturelles
Interpretive statement on licensure expectations 61 nonc dinterprtation sur les attentes et les exigences
and requirements en matire de permis dexercice
Interpretive statement on curriculum content for 64 nonc dinterprtation : Matire des cours dans les options
options and dual-discipline programs dun programme et dans les programmes bidisciplinaires
Use of the K-factor 65 Utilisation du facteur K
Interpretive statement on distance learning 69 nonc dinterprtation sur la formation distance
Interpretive statement on significant change 75 nonc dinterprtation sur les changements importants
Confidentiality: policies & procedures 76 Politiques et procdures de confidentialit
Conflicts of interest guideline 85 Lignes directrices sur les conflits dintrts
Program development advisory procedure 87 Procdure consultative pour llaboration des programmes
Procedures for Engineers Canada substantial 90 Procdures sappliquant aux valuations dquivalence
equivalency evaluations substantielle dIngnieurs Canada
Guidelines relating to coincident reviews 103 Lignes directrices sur les valuations concomitantes
Procedures for formal review of an Accreditation Board 108 Procdures de rvision officielle dune dcision de refus
decision to deny accreditation dagrment rendue par le Bureau dagrment

Annexe 1 Appendix 1
Regulations for granting
transfer credits
Updated: December 2011
Introduction
Te following regulations apply to the granting of
accreditation unit (AU) equivalencies (herein referred
to as transfer credits) to students for studies completed
at the same institution or at an institution other than the
one where they will receive their degree.
1.0 General requirements
1.1 Te home institution
1
must verify and provide
evidence that the curriculum content and quality
criteria described in the Accreditation Criteria and
Procedures are met by all students.
1.2 Te home institution must verify and provide
evidence that the academic level of the course for
which credit is granted is equal to or above the
academic level of the engineering program at the
home institution.
1.3 At the discretion of the Accreditation Board
a visit may be required to verify any evidence
presented by a program. If a visit is required to
an international destination, expenses will be
borne by the institution.
1.4 Tere are no restrictions on transfers of credits
among Accreditation Board-accredited programs,
however in all cases at least 50% of the program
shall be completed at the home institution.
1.5 Compliance with these regulations is required no
later than January 1, 2013.
1 Home institution: The degree-granting Canadian higher education institution
(HEI) that has requested Accreditation Board accreditation for an engineering
degree program that satisfies the academic requirements for the practice of
engineering at a professional level. (In the case of substantial equivalency
evaluations, the home institution is the HEI outside of Canada requesting
Accreditation Board substantial equivalency).
Rglements pour loctroi de
crdits de transfert
Mise jour : dcembre 2011
Introduction
Les rglements suivants sappliquent loctroi, des tudiants,
dquivalences dunits dagrment (UA) (appeles ici crdits
de transfert ) pour des cours suivis dans le mme tablisse-
ment ou dans un autre tablissement que celui o ils recevront
leur diplme.
1.0 Conditions gnrales
1.1 Ltablissement dattache
1
doit vrif er et prouver que
tous les tudiants satisfont aux normes du Bureau
dagrment concernant le contenu et la qualit du
programme dtudes qui sont dcrits dans les
Normes et procdures dagrment.
1.2 Ltablissement dattache doit vrifer et prouver
que le niveau du cours pour lequel le crdit est accord
est gal ou suprieur au niveau du programme de
gnie dispens par ltablissement dattache.
1.3 Le Bureau dagrment peut, sa discrtion, exiger
quune visite soit efectue pour vrifer toute preuve
prsente par ltablissement pour un programme
donn. Sil sagit dune visite ltranger, les dpenses
sont la charge de ltablissement.
1.4 Il ny a pas de restrictions imposes aux transferts
de crdits entre des programmes agrs par le Bureau
dagrment; cependant, dans tous les cas, au moins
la moiti (50 %) du programme doit tre efectue
ltablissement dattache.
1.5 La conformit ces rglements est exige au plus tard
le 1
er
janvier 2013.
1 tablissement dattache: tablissement denseignement suprieur (EES)
canadien qui dcerne le diplme et qui a prsent une demande dagrment au
Bureau canadien dagrment des programmes de gnie (le Bureau dagrment)
pour un programme menant un baccalaurat en gnie qui satisfait aux exigences
de formation pour lexercice professionnel du gnie. (Dans le cas des valuations
dquivalence substantielle, ltablissement dattache est lEES tranger qui prsente
une demande dquivalence substantielle au Bureau dagrment).
53
Annexe 1 Appendix 1
2.0 Octroi de crdits de transfert
2.1 Octroi, en fonction de chaque cas, de crdits
de transfert pour ladmission au dbut dun
programme (c.--d. cours individuels, pour
des tudiants individuels)
Pour ladmission dtudiants en fonction de chaque
cas, des crdits de transfert peuvent tre accords
pour des cours suivis dans dautres tablissements
denseignement suprieur (EES) ou pour des tudes
dans un autre domaine que le gnie suivies dans
ltablissement dattache. Ce type dadmission
sapplique aux tudiants qui ont :
i) soit efectu un transfert dun autre EES ou dun
programme dun autre domaine que le gnie au
sein de ltablissement dattache
ii) soit obtenu un baccalaurat ou un diplme
dtudes suprieures ou un diplme en technologie
ltablissement dattache ou un autre EES.
2.2 Octroi systmatique de crdits de transfert pour des
tudes suivies dans un autre EES avant ladmission
ltablissement dattache
Cela sapplique aux admissions dans les cas o il
existe des ententes ofcielles permettant aux tudiants
de faire des tudes dans un autre EES, y compris
un programme technique de trois ans dans un cgep
(Collge denseignement gnral et professionnel). Dans
ces cas, le programme ofert par ltablissement
dattache est conu pour permettre la poursuite
des tudes entreprises dans lautre EES, ou bien le
programme donn dans lautre EES est conu pour
faciliter la poursuite des tudes dans le cadre du
programme donn par ltablissement dattache.
2.3 Pour loctroi systmatique de crdits de transfert, une
procdure de validation ofciellement documente
doit tre en place. La procdure de validation pourrait
tre une dmonstration que ltablissement dattache
sassure ou vrife priodiquement que le contenu et
la qualit des cours de lautre EES pour lesquels des
crdits sont accords sont substantiellement quivalents
aux cours oferts dans le programme dtudes de
ltablissement dattache. Lorsque des crdits sont
accords pour des cours en sciences du gnie ou
conception en ingnierie, la vrifcation doit tre
conforme larticle 2.4 ci-dessous.
2.0 Granting of transfer credits
2.1 Case-by-case granting of transfer credits for
admission at the start of a program (i.e., individual
courses, for individual students)
When admitting students on a case-by-case basis,
transfer credits can be granted for studies at other
higher education institutions (HEI) or for non-
engineering studies at the home institution. Tis
type of admission applies to students who have
either:
i) transferred from another HEI or from
non-engineering studies within the home
institution, or
ii) completed an undergraduate, graduate or
technology program at the home institution
or at another HEI.
2.2 Systematic granting of transfer credits for studies
completed at another HEI prior to admission to
the home institution
Tis applies to student admissions where formal
agreements exist permitting students to complete
studies at another HEI, including 3-year technical
CEGEP (Collge denseignement gnral et profes-
sionnel) programs. In such cases, the program at the
home institution is designed to be a continuation of
the studies taken at the other HEI, or alternatively,
the program of the other HEI has been designed
to facilitate the continuation of studies within the
program at the home institution.
2.3 For the systematic granting of transfer credits, a
formally documented validation procedure must
be in place. Te validation procedure could be a
demonstration that the home institution monitors
or periodically verifes that the content and quality
of courses at the other HEI for which credits are
being granted are substantially equivalent to courses
ofered in the program of the home institution.
When credits are to be granted for engineering
science or engineering design, the verifcation shall
be consistent with article 2.4 herein.
Annexe 1 Appendix 1
2.3.1 Dans le cas des programmes pr-universitaires
de deux ans donns dans les cgeps, et pour lesquels
la procdure de validation dcrite larticle 2.3
susmentionn nest pas efectue, les restrictions
suivantes sappliquent :
a. Sciences du gnie et conception en ingnierie :
0 UA
b. Mathmatiques : 112 UA
c. Sciences naturelles : 112 AU
d. tudes complmentaires : 112 UA. Aucun
crdit nest accord pour les matires suivantes :
conomie de lingnierie, impact de la technologie
sur la socit, communication orale et crite, sant
et scurit, dontologie, quit et droit, et grance
environnementale et dveloppement durable.
e. Total de (b) + (c) + (d) : 225 AU
2.4 Transfert de crdits Sciences du gnie et
Conception en ingnierie
2.4.1 Si un crdit de transfert est accord pour des cours
en sciences du gnie ou en conception en ingnierie,
ltablissement dattache doit vrifer, par exemple
par le biais dune entente ofcielle, que lexpertise,
la comptence et le statut professionnel du corps
professoral sont substantiellement quivalents ceux
des enseignants donnant les programmes dtudes
agrs au Canada;
Ou
2.4.2 Dans le cas de crdits de transfert internationaux
dun programme qui est :
Jug substantiellement quivalent par le Bureau
dagrment
Agr par un signataire de lAccord de Washington, ou
Donn dans une zone de comptence avec laquelle
Ingnieurs Canada a conclu une entente de
reconnaissance mutuelle,
le contenu du programme reli aux sciences du gnie
et la conception en ingnierie peut tre transfr,
pourvu que les cours aient t donns par des ing-
nieurs autoriss exercer le gnie conformment aux
lois de la zone de comptence o les crdits ont t
obtenus. Les programmes qui sont substantiellement
quivalents, reconnus par les signataires de lAccord
de Washington, et viss par des ententes de reconnais-
sance mutuelle dIngnieurs Canada, sont numrs
dans les Normes et procdures dagrment.
Ou
2.3.1 For 2-year pre-university CEGEP programs for
which the validation procedure in article 2.3
herein is not performed, the following restrictions
apply:
a. Engineering science and engineering design:
0 AU
b. Mathematics: 112 AU
c. Natural science: 112 AU
d. Complementary studies: 112 AU; No credit
is given for the following: engineering economics,
impact of technology on society, oral and written
communication, health and safety, professional
ethics, equity and law, or environmental steward-
ship and sustainable development.
e. Total (b)+(c)+(d) 225 AU
2.4 Transfer of credits with Engineering Science
and Engineering Design content
2.4.1 If transfer credit is granted for engineering science
or engineering design, the home institution must
verify, for example through a formal agreement,
that the expertise, competence and professional
status of the faculty are substantially equivalent to
those of faculty delivering accredited programs in
Canada;
or,
2.4.2 For international transfer credits from a program
that is:
Determined to be substantially equivalent by
the Accreditation Board,
accredited by a Washington Accord signatory, or
in a jurisdiction with which Engineers Canada
has signed a mutual recognition agreement,
engineering science and engineering design curricu-
lum content can be transferred provided the courses
have been taught by engineers who are permitted
to practice engineering according to the laws of the
jurisdiction where the transfer credits are acquired.
Programs that are substantially equivalent, signa-
tories of the Washington Accord, and Engineers
Canada mutual recognition agreements are listed
in the Accreditation Criteria and Procedures;
or,
55
Annexe 1 Appendix 1
2.4.3 Dans le cas des crdits de transfert non viss aux
articles 2.2 ou 2.3 susmentionns, au moins 600 UA
en sciences du gnie et conception en ingnierie
(combines) et au moins 225 UA en conception en
ingnierie doivent tre obtenues ltablissement
dattache et crdites par celui-ci.
2.4.4 Dans tous les cas, la vaste exprience en conception
doit tre acquise ltablissement dattache ou sous le
contrle
2
de cet tablissement, et sous la responsabilit
professionnelle dun professeur titulaire dun permis
dexercice du gnie au Canada.
Les tableaux suivants visent illustrer lapplication de ces
rglements dans la plupart des circonstances.
2 La vaste exprience en conception peut tre acquise hors du Canada pourvu
que ce soit sous le contrle de ltablissement dattache. Cela signifie quil y a
co-supervision de lexprience en conception par un professeur de ltablissement
dattache, que lvaluation de lexprience en conception est effectue conformment
aux lignes directrices de ltablissement dattache, et que, une fois de retour
son tablissement dattache, ltudiant fournisse un rapport et donne une prsentation
orale sur lexprience acquise ltranger. Sur la base de ces conditions ou de
conditions semblables, et sous rserve de la confirmation que la co-supervision est
effectue par un ingnieur titulaire dun permis dexercice du gnie au Canada et
que les conditions ont t appliques, le Bureau dagrment considrera que la vaste
exprience en conception est sous le contrle de ltablissement dattache.
2.4.3 For transfer credits not covered under 2.4.1 or 2.4.2
above, at least 600 AU of engineering science and
engineering design (combined) and at least 225 AU
of engineering design must be completed at and
credit granted by the home institution.
2.4.4 In all cases the signifcant design experience must
be completed at or under the control
2
of the home
institution and must be under the professional
responsibility of faculty licensed to practice engi-
neering in Canada.
Te attached charts are intended to illustrate the applica-
tion of these regulations in most circumstances.

2 The significant design experience can be acquired outside Canada so long
as it is under the control of the home institution. This means that there is
co-supervision of the significant design experience by a professor from the home
institution, the evaluation of the significant design experience is done according
to the home institutions guidelines, and upon return to the home institution the
student provides a report and makes an oral presentation about the experience
in the foreign jurisdiction. Based on these or similar conditions, and subject to
confirmation that the co-supervision is done by an engineer who is licensed to
practice engineering in Canada and that the conditions have been implemented,
the Accreditation Board would consider the significant design experience to be
under the control of the home institution.

Appendix 1: Charts Annexe 1 : Tableaux
Credits Transferred Based On Domestic Studies
Accreditation Issue From HEI with
validation arrangements
From HEI without
From 2-year CEGEP
programs without
From Feeder
Institutions
(Satellite campuses, 3-year
technical CEGEP programs)
Academic Level
Must meet Accreditation
Board criteria.
Evaluated based on
documentation provided
by home institution.
Board criteria.
Evaluated based on
See the general require-
ments above, and in
particular item 1.1 as the
object here is to ensure
that all students meet the
requirements.
Formally documented
validation procedure must
be in place for all credits
transferred.
Engineering science
and engineering design
curriculum content
Evaluated based on
225 AU of engineering
design and 600 AU of
engineering science plus
engineering design must
be completed at the home
institution.
Evaluated based on
No credits in engineering
sciences and engineering
design may be transferred.
Formally documented
validation procedure must
be in place for all credits
transferred. See article 2.3
herein.
Significant Design
Experience
Evaluated based on by documentation provided by the home institution.
In all cases the significant design experience must be completed at or under the control
3
of the home institution and
must be under the professional responsibility of faculty licensed to practice engineering in Canada.
Limits to granting
of credits
At least 50% of the
program must be success-
fully completed at the home
institution (Canadian HEI)
At least 50% of the
a) Engineering science and
engineering design: 0 AU
b) Mathematics: 112 AU
c) Natural science: 112 AU
d) Complementary studies:
112 AU; No credit is given
for the following: engineer-
ing economics, impact of
technology on society, oral
and written communication,
health and safety, profes-
sional ethics, equity and law,
or environmental steward-
ship and sustainable
development
e) Total (b)+(c)+(d) 225 AU
At least 50% of the
3
The significant design experience can be acquired outside Canada so long as it is under the control of the home institution. This means that there is co-supervision of the
significant design experience by a professor from the home institution, the evaluation of the significant design experience is done according to the home institutions guidelines,
and upon return to the home institution the student provides a report and makes an oral presentation about the experience in the foreign jurisdiction. Based on these or similar
conditions, and subject to confirmation that the co-supervision is done by an engineer who is licensed to practice engineering in Canada and that the conditions have been
implemented, the Accreditation Board would consider the significant design experience to be under the control of the home institution.
57
Annexe 1 : Tableaux Appendix 1: Charts
Crdits transfrs en fonction dtudes effectues au Canada
Question dagrment EES ayant des
dispositions de
validation
EES nayant pas
de dispositions de
validation
Programmes de cgep
de 2 ans nayant pas
de dispositions de
validation
tablissements
affilis
(Campus satellites,
programmes techniques
de 3 ans donns dans
des cgeps)
Niveau denseignement
Doit tre conforme
aux normes du Bureau
dagrment.
valu en fonction de la
documentation fournie par
Doit tre conforme
dagrment.
Voir les exigences
gnrales ci-dessus et, en
particulier, larticle 1.1, car
lobjet ici est de sassurer
que tous les tudiants
satisfont aux exigences.
Une procdure de
validation officiellement
documente doit tre en
place pour tous les crdits
transfrs.
Cours de sciences du
gnie et de conception
en ingnierie faisant
partie du programme
dtudes
225 UA en conception
en ingnierie et 600 UA
en sciences du gnie, plus
conception en ingnierie,
doivent tre obtenues
Aucun crdit en sciences
du gnie et en conception
en ingnierie ne peut tre
transfr.
Une procdure de
validation officiellement
documente doit tre en
place pour tous les crdits
transfrs. Voir larticle 2.3
ci-dessus.
Vaste exprience
de la conception
en ingnierie
value en fonction de la documentation fournie par ltablissement dattache.
Dans tous les cas, la vaste exprience en conception doit tre obtenue ltablissement dattache ou sous
le contrle
3
de ltablissement dattache, et sous la responsabilit dun professeur titulaire dun permis dexercice
du gnie au Canada.
Limites loctroi
de crdits
Au moins 50 % du pro-
gramme doit tre suivi avec
succs ltablissement
dattache (EES canadien).
succs ltablissement
a) Sciences du gnie et
conception en ingnierie
= 0 UA
b) Mathmatiques 112 UA
c) Sciences naturelles
112 UA
d) tudes complmentaires
112 UA. Aucun crdit nest
accord pour les matires
suivantes : conomie de
lingnierie, impact de la
technologie sur la socit,
communication orale et
crite, sant et scurit,
dontologie, quit et droit,
et grance environnemen-
tale et dveloppement
durable.
e) Total de (b)+(c)+(d)
225 UA
succs ltablissement
3
La vaste exprience en conception peut tre acquise hors du Canada pourvu que ce soit sous le contrle de ltablissement dattache. Cela signifie quil y a co-supervision
de lexprience en conception par un professeur de ltablissement dattache, que lvaluation de lexprience en conception est effectue conformment aux lignes directrices
de ltablissement dattache, et que, une fois de retour son tablissement dattache, ltudiant fournisse un rapport et donne une prsentation orale sur lexprience acquise
ltranger. Sur la base de ces conditions ou de conditions semblables, et sous rserve de la confirmation que la co-supervision est effectue par un ingnieur titulaire dun permis
dexercice du gnie au Canada et que les conditions ont t appliques, le Bureau dagrment considrera que la vaste exprience en conception est sous le contrle
de ltablissement dattache.

Annexe 1 : Tableaux Appendix 1: Charts
Credits Transferred Based On International Studies
Accreditation Issue Formal Structure or Agreement Exists No Formal Structure
or Agreement
Satellite Campus
of Domestic HEI
Washington Accord or
Mutual Recognition
Agreement
International Exchange
agreements negotiated
by the HEI
Academic Level
Board criteria.
Evaluated based on
by home institution
(Canadian HEI).
Acceptable Verification required Verification required
Engineering science
and engineering design
curriculum content
Board criteria.
Evaluated based on
by home institution
(Canadian HEI).
Acceptable, provided
the courses have been
taught by engineers who
are permitted to practice
engineering according to
the laws of the jurisdiction
where the transfer credits
are acquired.
Verification required; the
courses must have been
taught by engineers who
are permitted to practice
engineering according to
the laws of the jurisdiction
where the transfer credits
are acquired.
Verification required
225 AU in engineering
design must be completed
at the home institution.
600 AU in engineering
sciences and engineering
design must be completed
at the home institution.
Significant Design
Experience
Evaluated based on documentation provided by the home institution (Canadian HEI).
Must be completed at or under the control of the Home Institution, see article 2.4 herein.
In all cases the significant design experience must be completed at or under the control
4
of the home institution and
must be under the professional responsibility of faculty licensed to practice engineering in Canada.
Limits to granting
of credits
At least 50% of the program must be successfully completed at the home institution (Canadian HEI)
4
The significant design experience can be acquired outside Canada so long as it is under the control of the home institution. This means that there is co-supervision of the
significant design experience by a professor from the home institution, the evaluation of the significant design experience is done according to the home institutions guidelines,
and upon return to the home institution the student provides a report and makes an oral presentation about the experience in the foreign jurisdiction. Based on these or similar
conditions, and subject to confirmation that the co-supervision is done by an engineer who is licensed to practice engineering in Canada and that the conditions have been
implemented, the Accreditation Board would consider the significant design experience to be under the control of the home institution.
59
Appendix 1: Charts Annexe 1 : Tableaux
Crdits transfrs en fonction dtudes effectues au Canada
Question dagrment Existence dune structure ou dententes officielles Absence de structure
ou dentente officielle
Campus satellite
dun EES canadien
Accord de Washington
ou Entente de recon-
naissance mutuelle
Ententes dchanges
internationaux ngo-
cies par lEES
Niveau denseignement
Doivent tre conformes
dagrment.
valus en fonction de la
(EES canadien).
Acceptable Vrification ncessaire Vrification ncessaire
Cours de sciences du
gnie et de conception
en ingnierie faisant
partie du programme
dtudes
Doivent tre conformes
dagrment.
valus en fonction de la
(EES canadien).
Acceptables, pourvu
que les cours aient t
donns par des ingnieurs
autoriss exercer le gnie
conformment aux lois de la
zone de comptence o les
crdits de transfert ont t
obtenus.
Vrification ncessaire;
les cours doivent avoir t
donns par des ingnieurs
autoriss exercer le gnie
conformment aux lois de la
zone de comptence o les
crdits ont t obtenus.
Vrification ncessaire
225 UA en conception
en ingnierie doivent tre
obtenues ltablissement
dattache.
600 UA en sciences
du gnie et conception
en ingnierie doivent tre
obtenues ltablissement
dattache.
Vaste exprience
de la conception
en ingnierie
value en fonction de la documentation fournie par ltablissement dattache (EES canadien).
Doit tre obtenue ltablissement dattache ou sous le contrle de ltablissement dattache;
voir larticle 2.4 ci-dessus.
Dans tous les cas, la vaste exprience en conception doit tre obtenue ltablissement dattache ou sous
le contrle
4
de ltablissement dattache, et sous la responsabilit dun professeur titulaire dun permis dexercice
du gnie au Canada.
Limites loctroi
de crdits
Au moins 50 % du programme doit tre suivi avec succs ltablissement dattache (EES canadien).
4
La vaste exprience en conception peut tre acquise hors du Canada pourvu que ce soit sous le contrle de ltablissement dattache. Cela signifie quil y a co-supervision
de lexprience en conception par un professeur de ltablissement dattache, que lvaluation de lexprience en conception est effectue conformment aux lignes directrices
de ltablissement dattache, et que, une fois de retour son tablissement dattache, ltudiant fournisse un rapport et donne une prsentation orale sur lexprience acquise
ltranger. Sur la base de ces conditions ou de conditions semblables, et sous rserve de la confirmation que la co-supervision est effectue par un ingnieur titulaire dun permis
dexercice du gnie au Canada et que les conditions ont t appliques, le Bureau dagrment considrera que la vaste exprience en conception est sous le contrle
de ltablissement dattache.
Annexe 2 Appendix 2
nonc dinterprtation sur
les sciences naturelles
(auparavant intitul nonc de principe du Bureau canadien
dagrment des programmes dingnierie sur lvaluation des
units dagrment alloues aux sciences fondamentales)
Remarque : Dans le cadre de la rvision des normes
dagrment en mai 2008, les sciences fondamentales
ont t renommes sciences naturelles .
En 2002, les normes du Bureau dagrment ont fait lobjet
de plusieurs modifcations. Lune des plus importantes a t
la diminution du nombre dunits dagrment (UA) requis
pour les sciences naturelles, qui est pass de 225 195.
Linclusion dlments de sciences naturelles dans tout
programme de gnie est importante pour un certain nombre
de raisons. Il y a tout dabord la ncessit pour les ingnieurs
de comprendre le monde physique dans lequel ils vivent et
travaillent. De plus, pour quils puissent mieux comprendre
leurs collgues des domaines scientifques et mieux com-
muniquer avec eux, les ingnieurs doivent avoir de solides
connaissances des principes et des mthodes scientifques.
Enfn, les sciences naturelles constituent les fondements
dune grande partie des sciences du gnie et de la conception
en ingnierie.
Il existe des difrences de base entre les sciences naturelles
et les sciences du gnie. Les sciences naturelles comprennent
lexploration des interactions physiques et chimiques du
monde naturel et lobservation et la comprhension
systmatiques des phnomnes au moyen de mthodes
analytiques et/ou exprimentales. Les sciences du gnie,
elles, mettent essentiellement en jeu lapplication crative
des principes labors partir des sciences naturelles, et ce,
pour rsoudre les problmes dingnierie. Il est donc crucial
que tous les programmes de gnie agrs aient une compos-
ante en sciences naturelles qui soit clairement identifable.
Cela peut se faire de plusieurs faons et ne veut pas forc-
ment dire que toutes les UA des sciences naturelles doivent
faire lobjet de cours distincts. Il suft que les UA alloues
aux sciences naturelles soient aisment identifables dans la
composante en sciences du gnie. Il incombe chacun des
programmes de gnie didentifer clairement la composante
en sciences naturelles dans leurs programmes dtudes.
26 septembre 2005
Mise jour : septembre 2008
Interpretive statement
on natural sciences
(previously entitled Accreditation Board Statement on the
Evaluation of Basic Science Accreditation Units)
Please note: A terminology change in the amended
criteria in May 2008 has resulted in references to
Basic Science being changed to Natural Science.
In 2002, the Accreditation Board criteria underwent
several changes. One of the most signifcant changes was
the decrease in the required natural science accreditation
units (AU) from 225 to 195.
Te inclusion of natural sciences in any engineering
program is important for a number of reasons. Foremost,
is the requirement for engineers to understand the physical
world in which they work and live. Additionally, in order
for engineers to better understand and communicate with
colleagues who are employed in the scientifc disciplines, it
is vital that they have a solid background in the scientifc
method and scientifc principles. Finally, the natural
sciences form the foundation upon which much of
engineering science and design is built.
Tere are fundamental diferences between natural science
and engineering science. Te natural sciences include the
exploration of the physical and chemical interactions of
the natural world and the systematic observation and
understanding of physical and natural phenomena through
analytical and/or experimental techniques. Te engineering
sciences primarily involve the creative application of the
principles developed through the natural sciences in the
solution of engineering problems. As such, it is vital
that all accredited engineering programs have a clearly
identifable natural science component. Tis can be
accomplished in a number of ways and does not necessari-
ly mean that all natural science AU need be in separate and
distinct courses. Rather, the AU counted towards natural
science must be readily and easily identifable relative to
the engineering science component. It is incumbent upon
each engineering program to clearly identify the natural
science component in their curricula.
September 26, 2005
Updated: September 2008
61
Annexe 3 Appendix 3
les attentes et les exigences en
matire de permis dexercice
La norme 3.5.3 du Bureau dagrment stipule que :
Le doyen de la facult de gnie (ou son quivalent) et le
directeur du dpartement (ou ladministrateur assumant la
responsabilit globale de chaque programme de gnie) doivent
assurer un leadership efcace de la formation en gnie et jouir
de la plus haute estime au sein de la profession dingnieur. On
sattend ce quils soient titulaires dun permis dexercice du
gnie au Canada, de prf rence dans la province ou le territoire
o est situ ltablissement denseignement. Dans les provinces
ou territoires o lenseignement du gnie est reconnu comme
de lexercice du gnie, on sattend ce que les administrateurs
soient titulaires du permis dexercice de la province ou du
territoire en question. Pour valuer la conformit cette norme,
le Bureau dagrment se fondera sur lnonc dinterprtation
sur les attentes et les exigences en matire de permis dexercice,
qui est joint ce document titre dannexe.
La norme 3.5.5 du Bureau dagrment stipule que :
Les professeurs qui donnent des cours portant essentielle-
ment sur les sciences du gnie et la conception en ingnierie
devraient tre titulaires dun permis dexercice du gnie au
Canada, de prfrence dans la province ou le territoire o est
situ ltablissement denseignement. Dans les provinces ou
territoires o lenseignement du gnie est reconnu comme de
lexercice du gnie, on sattend ce que ces professeurs soient
titulaires du permis dexercice de la province ou du territoire
en question. Pour valuer la conformit cette norme,
le Bureau dagrment se fondera sur lnonc dinterprtation
sur les attentes et les exigences en matire de permis dexercice,
qui est jointe ce document titre dannexe.
Voici les attentes sur lesquelles se fonde le Bureau
dagrment pour dterminer si la situation dun tablisse-
ment en ce qui concerne le droit dexercice du gnie du
corps professoral est conforme aux normes :
1. Toutes les formes de permis dexercice qui sont
octroys au Canada sont acceptables (ing., P.Eng.,
permis temporaire, permis provisoire, etc.). Les permis
dexercice octroys dans un autre pays (c.--d. P.E.
aux tats-Unis, CEng au Royaume-Uni, etc.) ne sont
pas considrs comme tant quivalents aux permis
octroys au Canada.
on licensure expectations
and requirements
Accreditation Board criterion 3.5.3 states:
Te dean of engineering (or equivalent ofcer) and the
head of an engineering program (or equivalent ofcer
with overall responsibility for each engineering program)
are expected to provide efective leadership in engineering
education and to have high standing in the engineering
community. Tey are expected to be engineers licensed
in Canada, preferably in the jurisdiction in which the
institution is located. In those jurisdictions where the
teaching of engineering is the practice of engineering,
the ofcers are expected to be engineers licensed in that
jurisdiction. To evaluate this criterion, the Accreditation
Board will rely on the Interpretive Statement on
Licensure Expectations and Requirements, which is
attached as an appendix to this document.
Accreditation Board criterion 3.5.5 states:
Faculty delivering curriculum content that is
engineering science and/or engineering design are
expected to be licensed to practise engineering in
Canada, preferably in the jurisdiction in which the
institution is located. In those jurisdictions where the
teaching of engineering is the practice of engineering,
they are expected to be licensed in that jurisdiction.
To evaluate this criterion, the Accreditation Board
will rely on the Interpretive Statement on Licensure
Expectations and Requirements, which is attached as
an appendix to this document.
In the determination of whether the professional
engineering licensure situation is compliant with
the criteria, the following are the expectations of
the Accreditation Board:
1. All forms of engineering licensure in Canada are
considered acceptable (P.Eng., temporary engineer-
ing license, provisional engineering license, etc.).
Licensure in other countries (i.e., P.E. in the U.S.,
CEng in the U.K., etc.) is not considered to be
equivalent to licensure in Canada.
2. Dans les provinces et les territoires o lenseignement
du gnie au niveau universitaire est lgalement dfni
comme tant le fait dexercer le gnie, tous les membres
du corps professoral doivent tre titulaires dun permis
dexercice dlivr dans la province ou le territoire o se
trouve ltablissement ofrant le programme de gnie,
conformment aux considrations sappliquant la
dure de lexprience denseignement et au contenu
du programme de gnie, tel que dcrit ci-aprs.
3. La vrifcation du droit dexercice des professeurs et
des autres enseignants (professeurs auxiliaires, chargs
de cours, etc.) se limitera ceux qui donnent des cours
portant sur les sciences du gnie et/ou la conception
en ingnierie.
4. a. Les membres du corps professoral auxquels
sappliquent les points 6 et 7, ci-dessous, et qui
enseignent depuis moins de cinq ans dans un
tablissement universitaire au Canada doivent :
Faire une demande de permis dexercice ou
de statut dingnieur stagiaire, ds leur entre
en poste.
Dmontrer quils font des eforts continus pour
satisfaire aux conditions lies lobtention du
permis dexercice (russir les examens prescrits,
acqurir de lexprience, etc.).
b. Les membres du corps professoral qui satisfont aux
conditions spcifes en 4(a) seront rputs satisfaire
la norme 3.5.5 pour ce qui est de lenseignement
des sciences du gnie, mais pas pour ce qui est de
lenseignement de la conception en ingnierie.
5. Les membres du corps professoral auxquels sappliquent
les points 6 et 7, ci-dessous, et qui enseignent depuis au
moins cinq ans dans un tablissement universitaire au
Canada doivent dtenir un permis dexercice, tel quil
est dfni au point 1, et le conserver.
6. Au moins 600 units dagrment, constitues dune
combinaison de cours de sciences du gnie et de
conception en ingnierie faisant partie dun pro-
gramme de gnie, doivent tre dispenses par des
enseignants dtenant un permis dexercice du gnie
ou tant en voie de lobtenir, conformment aux
points 1 et 4 ci-dessus.
Annexe 3 Appendix 3
2. In jurisdictions where teaching engineering at a
university is legally defned as the practice of
engineering, all faculty members shall be licensed
in the jurisdiction of the institution ofering the
engineering program, according to the timing and
curriculum content considerations described below.

3. Examination of engineering licensure shall be
restricted to that of faculty members and other
instructors (adjuncts, sessionals, etc.) teaching
courses that include engineering science and/or
engineering design curriculum content.
4. a. Faculty members who fall under points 6 and7,
below, and are within fve years of their initial
appointment to a faculty position at an academic
institution in Canada are expected to:
Initiate an application for professional engi-
neering licensure, or engineer-in-training/ing.
jr. status, upon starting their faculty position.
Demonstrate continuing progress in meeting
any conditions associated with achieving
professional licensure (completing assessed
examinations, obtaining experience, etc.).
b. Faculty members who meet the conditions
specifed in 4(a) would be considered to be
compliant with criterion 3.5.5 for the teaching
of engineering science, but would not be
considered to be compliant with criterion 3.5.5
for the teaching of engineering design.
5. Faculty members who fall under points 6 and 7,
below, and have spent fve or more years in a faculty
position at an academic institution in Canada shall
have, and maintain, licensure as defned in point 1.
6. A minimum of 600 Accreditation Units (AU)
ofa combination of engineering science and
engineering design curriculum content in an
engineering program shall be delivered by faculty
members holding, or progressing toward, profes-
sional engineering licensure as specifed in
points 1 and 4 above.
63
Annexe 3 Appendix 3
Ainsi, les membres du corps professoral qui enseignent
depuis moins de cinq dans une cole dingnierie
canadienne (et les autres enseignants, comme les
professeurs auxiliaires et les chargs de cours, engags
dans le processus dinscription) et qui travaillent active-
ment lobtention de leur permis dexercice peuvent
tre inclus dans le calcul visant les cours de sciences
du gnie, pour satisfaire au minimum de 600 units
dagrment combinant des cours de sciences du gnie
et de conception en ingnierie.
7. Au moins 225 units dagrment, constitues de
cours de conception en ingnierie faisant partie dun
programme de gnie, doivent tre dispenses par des
enseignants dtenant un permis dexercice du gnie
(tel que spcif ci-dessus au point 1, seulement).
8. En ce qui concerne les points 6 et 7, ci-dessus, pour
ce qui est des cours enseigns en quipe, et dans le
cas de multiples parties dun cours, le nombre total
dunits dagrment dispenses par des enseignants
titulaires du permis est tabli selon une approche de
cheminement minimum (tel que spcif ci-dessus
au point 1, seulement). Dans le cas de parties de cours
dupliques, tous les enseignants doivent satisfaire aux
exigences relatives au permis dexercice pour que les
units dagrment soient incluses dans le calcul.
Si un cours est donn par une quipe, il doit tre
clair que les lments de sciences du gnie et de
conception en ingnierie sont enseigns par des
membres du corps professoral titulaires du permis
dexercice. Dans certains cas, une fraction du total
dunits dagrment pourrait tre revendique pour
les cours donns par une quipe denseignants.
9. Pour faire en sorte que les contenus en sciences
du gnie (SG), en conception en ingnierie (CI),
en sciences naturelles (SN), en mathmatiques (Math)
et en tudes complmentaires (EC) soient immdiate-
ment identifables, chaque cours dun programme de
gnie devrait tre dcrit laide dun maximum de trois
catgories (SG, CI, SN, Math, EC), aucune catgorie
ne devant constituer moins de 25 p. cent du total
dunits dagrment pour un cours particulier.
10. Il incombe ltablissement ofrant le programme
de justifer les aspects particuliers de tout cours qui
droge la clause 9.
En vigeur en juin 2007
Tus, faculty members who are within fve years
of their frst-time appointment in a Canadian
engineering school (and other instructors, such as
adjuncts and sessionals, in the registration process)
and are actively pursuing licensure can be counted
for courses involving engineering science to satisfy
the 600 AU of engineering science and engineer-
ing design minimum.

7. A minimum of 225 AU of engineering design
curriculum content in an engineering program
shall be delivered by faculty members holding
professional engineering licensure (as specifed
in point 1, only, above).
8. In respect of 6 and 7 above, for team-taught
courses, and in the case of multiple sections of a
particular course, a minimum path approach is
taken toward establishing the total AU actually
delivered by licensed faculty (as specifed in point 1,
only, above). For duplicate sections all instructors
must meet the licensure requirements in order for
the AU to be counted. If the course is team-taught
then it must be clear that the engineering science
and engineering design components are delivered
by faculty holding professional engineering
licensure. In some cases, for team-taught courses,
a fraction of the total AU could be claimed.

9. In order to ensure that engineering science,
engineering design, natural science, mathematics
and complementary studies curriculum contents
are readily and easily identifable, each course
in an engineering program should be described
using a maximum of three curriculum categories
(ES, ED, NS, Math, CS) with no single category
constituting less than 25% of the total AU for a
particular course.
10. It is up to the institution ofering the program
to justify the unique aspects of any course that
deviates from clause 9.
Efective June 2007
nonc dinterprtation :
Matire des cours dans les
options dun programme et dans
les programmes bidisciplinaires
Le Bureau dagrment prsente des notes dinterprtation afn
dexpliciter les motifs sous-tendant quelques attentes majeures
qui suscitent de nombreuses demandes de renseignements
et qui ne sont pas dfnies explicitement dans les normes
dagrment du Bureau dagrment. Cette note porte sur la
matire des cours dans les options dun programme et dans
les programmes bisciplinaires.
Afn de laisser place la fexibilit, le Bureau dagrment
a vit de dfnir trop troitement les exigences spcifques
aux options dun programme et aux programmes
bidisciplinaires.
Cependant le Bureau dagrment sattend gnralement
retrouver dans les cours dune option lquivalent dun
semestre de sujets qui lui sont propres (science du gnie
et/ou conception en ingnierie) et qui constituent le fonde-
ment de loption. De la mme faon, le Bureau dagrment
sattend un quilibre quantitatif approximatif dans les
matires propres chacune des disciplines mentionnes
dans le titre dun programme bidisciplinaire. De plus, le
programme doit satisfaire toutes les normes dagrment
du Bureau dagrment pour chaque discipline identife
dans le titre.
Pour fns dagrment, le dveloppement et le maintien
de ces programmes doivent se conformer cette note
dinterprtation.
Annexe 4 Appendix 4
Interpretive statement on
curriculum content for options
and dual-discipline programs
Te Accreditation Board develops statements of inter-
pretation to clarify the intent underlying certain key
expectations which generate frequent inquiries and
are not otherwise covered by the Accreditation Board
accreditation criteria. Te following statement of inter-
pretation addresses the issue of curriculum content for
options and dual-discipline programs.
In the interest of allowing for fexibility, the Accreditation
Board has avoided a strict defnition of the requirements
for both program options and dual-discipline engineering
degrees.
Typically, however, the Accreditation Board seeks the
equivalent of one semester of subject-specifc content in
courses (engineering science and/or engineering design) as
the basis for an option. Similarly, the Accreditation Board
seeks a rough balance in subject-specifc content between
the two disciplines named in a dual-discipline program
title, and the program must meet the Accreditation Board
accreditation requirements for each discipline named.

For the purpose of accreditation, the preceding statement
of interpretation should be respected in the development
and maintenance of such oferings.
65
Annexe 5 Appendix 5
Utilisation du facteur K
Introduction
Le Bureau canadien dagrment des programmes de gnie
suggre lutilisation du concept appel facteur K pour
calculer le nombre dunits dagrment (UA) des cours
qui ne suivent pas le format traditionnel cours magistral/
priode de laboratoire . Ce document explique le processus
suivre pour le calcul du facteur K et donne quelques
exemples dutilisation du facteur K (ou dun processus
semblable). Note : les exemples prsents ci-dessous le
sont des ns dillustration uniquement. La dtermination
nale de la validit de lutilisation ou de lapplication de
cette formule relve du Bureau dagrment.
Dfinitions
Pour toute activit menant des crdits universitaires et
pour laquelle le nombre dheures connexes correspond au
temps de contact pour cette activit, les units dagrment
(UA) sont dfnies comme suit (sur une base horaire) :
une heure denseignement (correspondant 50 minutes
dactivit) = 1UA, une heure de laboratoire ou de travail
dirig = 0,5 UA. Cette dfnition sapplique la plupart
des cours magistraux et des priodes de laboratoire ou de
travail dirig. Les cours dune dure autre que 50 minutes
sont considrs au prorata de cette dure.
Dans le cas dune activit pour laquelle le concept dheures
de contact ne permet pas de dcrire correctement lampleur
du travail, tels que dimportants projets de conception ou
de recherche, ou des travaux comparables ofciellement
reconnus comme tant requis pour lobtention du diplme,
ltablissement denseignement doit utiliser une mesure
quivalente en units dagrment qui soit compatible avec la
dfnition prsente ci-dessus. Une des faons de dterminer
cette quivalence, quand une unit de crdit universitaire
est dfnie par ltablissement pour mesurer le contenu du
programme dtudes, consiste efectuer un calcul bas sur
la proportionnalit. Un facteur K est dfni comme suit :
UA pour tous les cours obligatoires et du programme
(base horaire)
K =
units dfinies par ltablissement pour les mme cours
Puis, pour chaque cours dont le contenu nest pas
mesurable sur une base horaire, lon obtient le nombre
dunits dagrment en multipliant par K les units dfnies
par ltablissement pour cette activit.
Use of the K-Factor
Introduction
Te Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board suggests
the use of something called a K-Factor for courses that
do not follow the traditional lecture/lab format. Tis
document explains the process for calculation of the
K-Factor and gives some examples in which the use
of the K-Factor (or a similar process) might be used.
Note: the examples provided below are for illustrative
purposes only. Te nal determination of the validity
of the use or application of this formula rests with the
Accreditation Board.
Definitions
Accreditation Units (AU) are defned as follows (hourly
basis) for an activity which is granted academic credit and
for which the associated number of hours corresponds to
the actual contact time of that activity: one hour of lecture
(corresponding to 50 minutes of activity) = 1 AU and
one hour of laboratory or tutorial work = 0.5 AU. Tis
defnition is applicable to most lectures and periods of
laboratory or tutorial work. Classes of other than the
nominal 50-minute duration are treated proportionally.
For an activity for which contact hours cannot be used
to properly describe the extent of the work involved,
such as signifcant design or research projects or similar
work ofcially recognized by the institution as a degree
requirement, an equivalent measure in Accreditation
Units must be used by the institution to be consistent
with the above defnition. One method for determining
this equivalence, when a unit of academic credit is defned
by the institution to measure curriculum content, is a
calculation on a proportionality basis. A factor K is
defned as follows:
AU for all common and compulsory courses
(hourly basis)
K =
units defined by the institution for the same courses
Ten, for each course not accounted for on an hourly
basis, the number of Accreditation Units is obtained by
multiplying the units defned by the institution for that
course by K.
Exemple de calcul
Par exemple, luniversit canadienne, lunit de crdit dfnie
par ltablissement est lheure-crdit, et le programme de gnie
civil comprend 46 heures-crdits de cours obligatoires du
tronc commun et 51 heures-crdits de cours obligatoires
du programme dtudes.
Sur la base du nombre publi dheures de cours magistraux
et de priodes de laboratoire par semaine et dune moyenne
de 12,2 semaines par session universitaire, le nombre dunits
dagrment (UA) attribues aux cours obligatoires du tronc
commun tait de 702 UA et le nombre dUA attribues aux
cours obligatoires du programme dtudes tait de 805 UA.
Le calcul du facteur K est donc le suivant :
702 + 805 1507
K =
___________
=
____
= 15,5
46 + 51 97
Exemples dutilisation du facteur K
Note : Ces exemples ne sont que des illustrations.
La dtermination fnale de la validit de lutilisation ou de
lapplication de cette formule relve du Bureau dagrment.
Crdit pour projet de conception
Luniversit canadienne prvoit un projet de conception
ralis en quipe pendant la dernire anne du programme
qui stend sur deux sessions et comprend 1 heure de cours
magistral au cours de la premire session seulement. Le reste
du cours est constitu de runions de groupe informelles avec
des membres du corps professoral et du travail non supervis
sur le projet. Pour obtenir une note pour ce cours, les quipes
dtudiants doivent produire et prsenter un rapport fnal
un panel constitu denseignants et de reprsentants de
lindustrie. Ce cours ne peut pas tre reprsent quitable ment
sur la base dheures de cours magistraux ou dheures de con-
tact. la recommandation de la facult de gnie, luniversit
attribue ce cours 6 heures-crdits. En utilisant le facteur K,
le nombre dUA revendiques est : 6 15,5 = 93 UA dans la
catgorie conception en ingnierie .
Annexe 5 Appendix 5
Sample calculation
For example, the institutional unit of course credit
at Canada University is the credit hour and the Civil
Engineering program includes 46 credit hours of core
compulsory courses and 51 credit hours of program
compulsory courses.
Based on the published lecture and laboratory
hours per week and an average of 12.2 weeks per
academic term, the accreditation units (AUs) assigned
for core compulsory courses were 702 AU and for
program compulsory courses 805 AU. Te K-Factor
calculation is thus:
702 + 805 1507
K =
___________
=
____
= 15.5
46 + 51 97
Examples of the use of the K-Factor
Note: these examples are for illustrative purposes only. Te
fnal determination of the validity of the use or application
of this formula rests with the Accreditation Board.
Design project credit
Canada University has a fnal year group design project
which extends over two terms and involves 1 hour of
lecture in the frst term only. Te remainder of the course
includes informal group meetings with faculty members
and unsupervised project work. Student groups must
produce and present a fnal report to a panel of faculty
and industry representatives to obtain a grade for the
course. Tis course cannot be fairly represented based
on either lecture or other contact hours. Te university
assigns 6university credit hours to the course based on
the recommendation of the Faculty of Engineering.
Using the K-Factor the number of AU claimed are
6 15.5 = 93 AU in the engineering design category.
67
Annexe 5 Appendix 5
Crdit pour stage/programme coop
Luniversit canadienne ofre un programme de stages dans le
cadre duquel les tudiants peuvent sinscrire des stages allant
de deux quatre priodes de quatre mois. Pour chaque priode
de stage, les tudiants doivent rdiger un rapport qui est valu
par leur superviseur de stage et par un membre du corps pro-
fessoral. Ce cours ne peut pas tre reprsent quitablement sur
la base dheures de cours magistraux ou dheures de contact.
la recommandation de la facult de gnie, luniversit attribue
chaque priode de stage 2 heures-crdits. En utilisant le fac-
teur K, le nombre dUA revendiques est : 2 15,5 = 31 UA
par priode de stage. tant donn quelle ne peut quantifer ni
garantir le contenu exact de ces priodes de stage, luniversit
canadienne a choisi de rclamer de 31 UA (une priode de
stage) 124 UA (quatre priodes de stage). Cette revendica-
tion devrait sappuyer sur des preuves concrtes (examines et
supervises par un ingnieur titulaire dun permis dexercice).
Crdit pour apprentissage en ligne
Luniversit canadienne ofre un cours en ligne dconomie
de lingnierie auquel les tudiants peuvent sinscrire en tout
temps aprs avoir termin une anne de cours gnraux en
gnie. Les tudiants doivent excuter une srie de tests
dvaluation en ligne et peuvent participer des exercices
de groupe assists par ordinateur. Ce cours ne peut pas
tre reprsent quitablement sur la base dheures de cours
magistraux ou dheures de contact. la recommandation
de la facult de gnie, luniversit attribue ce cours
3 heures-crdits. En utilisant le facteur K, le nombre dUA
revendiques est 3 15,5 = 46 UA (aucune dcimale ne doit
tre utilise dans la dclaration des UA) dans la catgorie
tudes complmentaires .
Crdit pour camp de terrain
Luniversit canadienne ofre un camp de terrain de
deux semaines o les tudiants apprennent une varit
de techniques de levs, dinstrumentation et de collecte
de donnes sous la supervision de professeurs. Les tudiants
travaillent sept heures par jour pendant dix jours, lexclusion
du temps de dplacement et des pauses repas. Chaque soir,
les tudiants doivent efectuer des travaux de conception en
utilisant les donnes recueillies sur le terrain, travaux qui
sont nots par les professeurs. Les tudiants doivent aussi
concevoir leurs exercices de collecte de donnes afn de
rsoudre un problme spcif au cours des cinq derniers
jours du cours. Ce cours ne peut pas tre reprsent quitable-
ment sur la base dheures de cours magistraux ou dheures
de contact.
Coop/Internship credit
Canada University has an internship program for
which students may register for between two and four
four-month work terms. Students must write a report
on each work term which is reviewed by their work-term
supervisor and a faculty member. Tis course cannot be
fairly represented based on either lecture or other contact
hours. Te university assigns 2 university credit hours
to each work term based on the recommendation of the
Faculty of Engineering. Using the K-Factor the number
of AUs claimed are 2 15.5 = 31 AU per work term.
Because Canada University cannot quantify or guarantee
the exact content for such work terms, they chose to claim
31 AU (one term) to 124AU (four terms). Substantive
evidence would be required for this claim (reviewed and
supervised by a P.Eng./ing.).
E-Learning credit
Canada University has an on-line course in engineering
economics for which students may register at any time
after completing one-year of general engineering. Students
must complete a series of on-line self assessment tests and
can participate in computer-mediated group exercises. Tis
course cannot be fairly represented based on either lecture
or other contact hours. Te university assigns 3 university
credit hours to the course based on the recommendation
of the Faculty of Engineering. Using the K-Factor the
number of AU claimed are 315.5=46AU (no decimals
should be used in the reporting of AU) in the comple-
mentary studies category.
Field camp credit
Canada University has a two-week feld camp where
students learn a variety of feld mapping, instrumentation
and data collection techniques under faculty supervision.
Te students work seven hours a day for 10 days excluding
travel time and meal breaks. Daily design assignments
using feld data are completed in the evenings and graded
by faculty. Students must also design their group data
collection exercises to solve a specifed problem for the
fnal 5 days of the course. Tis course cannot be fairly
represented based on either lecture or other contact hours.
la recommandation de la facult de gnie, luniversit
attribue ce cours 3 heures-crdits. En utilisant le facteur K,
le nombre dUA revendiques est : 3 15,5 = 46 UA dans les
catgories sciences du gnie et conception en ingnierie .
Crdit pour apprentissage bas sur la rsolution
de problmes
Luniversit canadienne prvoit une session entire o les
tudiants doivent rsoudre des problmes prcis exigeant des
connaissances en mathmatiques, en sciences naturelles et
en sciences du gnie. Les quipes de projet peuvent sadresser
un groupe denseignants pour leur demander de laide au
besoin. Les tudiants sont censs travailler de huit douze
heures par jour, cinq jours par semaine, pendant toute la
session. Les tudiants sont nots par les enseignants sur la
base de lapplication de leurs connaissances la rsolution des
problmes prescrits. Cette session ne peut pas tre reprsente
quitablement sur la base dheures de cours magistraux ou
dheures de contact. la recommandation de la facult de
gnie, luniversit attribue 16 heures-crdits cette session
de rsolution de problmes. En utilisant le facteur K, le
nombre dUA revendiques est : 16 15,5 = 248 UA dans
les catgories mathmatiques, sciences naturelles et science
du gnie .
Te university assigns 3 university credit hours to the
course based on the recommendation of the Faculty of En-
gineering. Using the K-Factor the number of AU claimed
are 315.5 = 46 AU in the engineering science and
engineering design categories.
Problem-based learning credit
Canada University has an entire term where students are
required to solve specifc problems that require skills in
mathematics, natural science and engineering science.
Te project groups may use a group of faculty as resources
from which they can request help as and when required.
Te students are expected to work 8-12 hours a day 5
days a week throughout the term. Students are graded by
faculty based on their application of skills to the assigned
problems. Tis term of study cannot be fairly represented
based on either lecture or other contact hours. Te uni-
versity assigns 16 university credit hours to the PBL-term
based on the recommendation of the Faculty of Engineer-
ing. Using the K-Factor the number of AU claimed are
16 15.5 = 248 AU in the mathematics, natural science
and engineering science categories.
Annexe 5 Appendix 5
69
la formation distance
1
1. Introduction
Ingnieurs Canada, par lintermdiaire du Bureau canadien
dagrment des programmes de gnie, encourage les approches
novatrices en matire de conception et de prestation de pro-
grammes qui ofrent des options souples pour les tudiants et
la fourniture de nouveaux produits de formation en gnie. En
autorisant une certaine souplesse dans les options de presta-
tion, le Bureau dagrment sattend ce que ces programmes
produisent les mmes rsultats ducatifs, quelles que soient les
mthodes de prestation. Cela est particulirement pertinent
quand aucune difrenciation nest tablie dans le titre du
programme ou lidentifcation du cours sur la base du mode
de prestation.
Actuellement, au Canada, les tudiants peuvent suivre des
cours distance dans le cadre dun programme de gnie, mais
la majeure partie des programmes agrs se donne sur les
campus. Dans lavenir, la formation en gnie au Canada pour-
rait voluer vers la possibilit pour les tudiants de suivre un
programme principalement bas sur la formation distance.
Le Bureau canadien dagrment des programmes de gnie a
labor cet nonc dinterprtation afn de guider les tablisse-
ments denseignement suprieur (EES) qui ofrent des cours
de formation distance intgrs des programmes agrs, et
en prvision de limplantation de programmes de formation
distance.
Les normes du Bureau dagrment ne limitent pas lagrment
un mode de prestation particulier; la formation distance nest
pas exclue.
2. Dfinition de la formation distance
La formation distance est un mode de prestation qui nexige
pas que ltudiant assiste des cours ou des activits des
heures ou des endroits particuliers.
1
Cet nonc dinterprtation sinspire de nombreux documents semblables
prpars par dautres organismes dagrment; en particulier, il sinspire de
la documentation provenant dEngineers Australia et de lUK Joint Board of
Moderators.
Interpretive statement on
distance learning
1
1. Introduction
Engineers Canada, through the Canadian Engineering
Accreditation Board, encourages innovative approaches to
program design and delivery leading to fexible options for
the beneft of students and for the provision of new engi-
neering education products. In allowing for fexibility in
delivery options, the Accreditation Board expects programs
to achieve the same educational outcomes regardless of the
delivery method(s). Tis is particularly relevant when
neither the title of the program nor the identifcation of
the course is diferentiated on the basis of delivery mode.

At the present time in Canada, students may complete
distance learning courses as part of an engineering degree
program but the majority of accredited programs are
campus based. In future, engineering education in Canada
may evolve such that students follow a program that is
based predominantly on distance learning.
To provide guidance to higher education institutions
(HEI) ofering distance learning courses that are embed-
ded in programs that have received Accreditation Board
accreditation and in anticipation of distance learning
programs, the Accreditation Board has developed this
interpretive statement.
Accreditation Board criteria do not limit accreditation to any
particular mode of delivery; distance learning courses and
programs are not excluded.
2. Definition of distance learning
Distance learning is a mode that does not require the
student to attend particular classes or events at particular
times or particular locations.
1
This interpretive statement has been prepared by referencing many similar
documents prepared by other accreditation bodies, in particular, they are
derived from the documentation of Engineers Australia and of the UK Joint
Board of Moderators.
Annexe 6 Appendix 6
Annexe 6 Appendix 6
3. Principes cls
Les normes et procdures dagrment qui sappliquent au
rendement attendu valent aussi pour la formation distance,
comme pour tout autre type de mode de prestation de cours.
Lefcacit de tout systme de contrle de la qualit construit
expressment pour la formation distance devrait tre value.
Lvaluation des travaux des tudiants inscrits des cours de
formation distance et les rsultats de ces tudiants doivent
tre de mme niveau que ceux de tout cours quivalent
temps plein ou temps partiel donn par ltablissement
denseignement.
En ce qui concerne les visites dagrment, les tablissements
denseignement suprieur devraient tre aviss ds que pos-
sible des exigences particulires en matire dinformation, de
preuves ou de prparation des visites qui pourraient difrer
de celles qui sappliquent normalement aux cours donnes
sur le campus.
Il faudra former les membres des quipes de visiteurs pour
quils puissent procder lvaluation de la formation
distance. Ces quipes examineront les difrents types de
matriel didactique utiliss dans la prestation de formation
distance, matriel qui est tout aussi valable que les nombreux
autres modes de livraison employs dans les programmes. Les
quipes de visiteurs examineront la formation distance en
utilisant la mme rigueur et les mmes normes que celles qui
sappliquent tout autre mode de prestation.
4. Questions pouvant avoir une incidence sur
lagrment de la formation distance
La souplesse inhrente aux cours de formation distance peut
poser certains dfs pour les politiques et procdures tablies
en matire dagrment. Des questions particulires peuvent se
poser en ce qui concerne lapprentissage distance et il faudra
tenir compte de ces questions et des autres aspects de la pres-
tation de formation distance lors de lagrment.
4.1 Questions touchant principalement
lorganisation et la prestation de programmes
1. Dure potentiellement prolonge des programmes
de formation distance
2. Participation de divers partenaires de prestation
3. Diversit des groupes dtudiants
4. Possibilit de programmes personnaliss
3. Key principles
Accreditation criteria and procedures that apply to
performance expectations apply to distance learning
courses as for any other type of course delivery mode.
Te efectiveness of any quality systems, purpose-built
for distance learning, should be assessed.
Assessment of distance learning assignments and student
performance must be at the same level as any equivalent
full or part-time courses being delivered by the academic
institution.
For accreditation visits, higher education institutions
(HEI) should be notifed as early as possible about any
requirements for information, evidence or visit arrange-
ments that are additional or diferent to those normally
required for campus-based courses.
Tere is a requirement to train visiting team members
so that they can carry out accreditation of distance learn-
ing. Teams will be reviewing diferent types of material
used for a distance learning course delivery but these are
no less valid than the many other modes encountered in
programs. Distance learning will be examined by visiting
teams using the same rigour and standards applied to any
other delivery mode.
4. Distance learning issues that may
affect accreditation
Te inherent fexibility of distance learning courses can
pose challenges to established accreditation policies and
procedures. Particular issues that may arise in relation to
distance learning and account should be taken of these
issues and any other aspects of distance learning provision
when carrying out accreditation.
4.1 Issues primarily relevant to program
organization and delivery
1. Te potentially open-ended nature of distance
learning programs
2. Te involvement of a range of delivery partners
3. Te diversity of student groups
4. Te opportunity for individually tailored
programs
71
Annexe 6 Appendix 6
4.1.1 Dure potentiellement prolonge des programmes
de formation distance
Compte tenu de la rapidit des changements survenant
dans lexercice du gnie, certaines proccupations ont
t souleves quant au fait que des tudiants prennent
beaucoup de temps pour complter un programme de
formation distance, compte tenu du risque que les
cours plus anciens inclus dans les programmes
ne soient plus dactualit.
Le temps que les tudiants peuvent prendre pour
terminer un programme nest pas ncessairement un
obstacle lagrment, si les rsultats de lapprentissage
sont atteints. Cependant, lvolution rapide du gnie
justife limposition de limites de temps globales
pour la russite dun programme. Les tablissements
denseignement canadiens imposent gnralement un
dlai maximal de 10 ans pour la russite dun pro-
gramme menant un diplme. Il ny a aucune raison
pour que la formation distance prolonge au-del
des normes actuelles le dlai dont les tudiants ont
besoin pour terminer un programme.
Les tablissements denseignement suprieur devraient
indiquer, dans leur rponse au questionnaire dauto-
valuation pour lagrment, le dlai maximum autoris
pour la russite de leurs programmes de formation
distance.
4.1.2 Participation de divers partenaires de prestation
Les normes du Bureau dagrment prvoient loption
dexiger une visite dagrment dans tous les endroits
o des cours sont donns (campus satellites, tablisse-
ments af lis) et cela sapplique galement la
prestation de formation distance.
Ltablissement dattache est responsable des normes
des grades universitaires dcerns et de la qualit
de la prestation de cours menant ces grades. Les
dispositions prises pour assurer la qualit et le respect
des normes devraient tre aussi rigoureuses, sres et
sujettes examen que celles qui sappliquent aux cours
donns entirement sous la responsabilit dun mme
tablissement et au moyen de modes denseignement
traditionnels (cours donns en classe).
4.1.1 The potentially open-ended nature of distance
learning programs
In view of the pace of change in engineering
practice, concern has been expressed about students
taking long periods to complete a distance learning
degree, such that older courses included in degree
programs may no longer be current.

Te length of time that students might take to
complete a program need not be a barrier to
accreditation if the required learning outcomes are
being achieved. However, the rapid pace of change
warrants overall time limits for program comple-
tion, individual Canadian institutions typically
require completion of degree requirements within
periods shorter than 10 years. Tere is no reason for
distance learning to extend the time students take
to complete programs beyond the current norms.

HEI should specify in the accreditation self-study
questionnaire submission document the maximum
length of time permitted for completion of their
distance learning program(s).
4.1.2 The involvement of a range of delivery partners
Te Accreditation Board criteria include an option
to require an accreditation visit to all locations
where courses are delivered (satellite campuses,
feeder institutions) and this applies to distance
learning provision.
Te home (awarding) institution is responsible for
the academic standards of its awards and the quality
of provision leading to them. Te arrangements for
assuring quality and standards should be as rigor-
ous, secure and open to scrutiny as those for courses
provided wholly within the responsibility of a single
institution and through conventional class-based
modes of teaching.
Annexe 6 Appendix 6
Un tablissement dattache peut catgoriser comme
tant de la formation distance un cours qui est en fait
donn en vertu dun accord de transfert de crdits. Il y
aurait donc lieu dexaminer attentivement la documen-
tation soumise lappui dune demande dagrment
afn didentifer toute dclaration errone et de veiller
ce quune valuation approprie soit ralise.
4.1.3 Diversit des groupes dtudiants
La souplesse de la formation distance est attrayante
pour ceux qui ne souhaitent pas ou ne peuvent pas
assister des cours donns sur un campus. Des don-
nes sur la progression des tudiants et leur passage
dune anne la suivante sont exiges comme pour
tout autre programme. Les niveaux de progression
devraient tre semblables ceux dun programme
donn sur le campus.
De plus en plus, les tablissements denseignement
suprieur ofrent de multiples points dentre durant
lanne scolaire, et les tudiants ne progressent pas
ncessairement dans les programmes de formation
distance en tant que cohortes. Il est donc important
que le point de rfrence pour le dlai de russite dun
programme soit le moment o un tudiant commence
le programme.
4.1.4 Possibilit de programmes personnaliss
Bien que la formation distance ofre, potentielle-
ment, davantage de souplesse pour personnaliser
des programmes en fonction dtudiants individuels,
lagrment exige la satisfaction, par chaque tudiant,
de toutes les normes du Bureau dagrment relatives
au contenu du programme dtudes, quel que soit le
mode de prestation de la formation.
Les tudiants devraient tre adquatement informs
des choix de cours. Il pourrait tre ncessaire de leur
fournir de linformation sur des groupes de cours
ofrant des cheminements particuliers dans le cadre
dun programme gnral.
A home institution may class as distance learning a
course that is in fact being delivered under a credit-
transfer agreement. Careful scrutiny of accreditation
submission documentation should be undertaken
to identify any misrepresentation and ensure that
appropriate accreditation activity is undertaken.
4.1.3 The diversity of student groups
Te fexibility of distance learning is attractive to
those who may not wish, or be able, to attend cam-
pus. Progression and promotion data are required
as for any program. Levels of progression should be
similar to those for a campus-based program.

HEI are increasingly ofering multiple entry
points during the academic year and students
may not move through distance learning programs
as a cohort. Terefore it is important that the refer-
ence point for time-in-program is the point
at which the individual student enters the
program.
4.1.4 The opportunity for individually tailored programs
While distance learning potentially enables more
fexibility in tailoring programs to individual
students, Accreditation Board accreditation requires
satisfaction of all Accreditation Board curriculum
content criteria by every student, regardless of
delivery mode.
Students should be properly advised about course
choices. Information about the fagging of groups
of courses as providing particular pathways within
an overall program may be required.
73
Annexe 6 Appendix 6
4.2 Questions touchant principalement
lorganisation et la prestation de cours
individuels
1. Robustesse des systmes de soutien destins
aux tudiants
2. Soutien des activits de projet et du travail dquipe
et accs aux laboratoires
3. Ncessit de confrmer lidentit de ltudiant
4.2.1 Robustesse des systmes de soutien destins
aux tudiants
Les cours de formation distance doivent tre
soutenus par une solide plateforme de livraison. Les
tablissements denseignement doivent prouver que les
systmes de communications mis en place permettent
les interactions entre les tudiants, leurs instructeurs et
leurs pairs, de sorte que ces tudiants ne soient pas
dsavantags par rapport aux tudiants qui suivent des
cours en classe. Les tudiants devraient avoir un accs
adquat aux services aux tudiants, pdagogiques et
administratifs, et obtenir une rtroaction rapide au
sujet de leurs travaux. La plateforme de livraison peut
tre un environnement dapprentissage virtuel (EAV)
2

ou un systme semblable.
Dans le cadre du processus dagrment, les quipes de
visiteurs devront pouvoir accder cette plateforme,
sil y a lieu, pralablement une visite. Les valuateurs
accorderont plus dimportance aux systmes de presta-
tion et de communications, et les tablissements
denseignement pourraient tre tenus de fournir
davantage de dtails ce sujet que ce qui est exig
pour les cours dispenss en classe.
Les opinions des tudiants inscrits des cours
distance devront tre incluses dans les commentaires
des tudiants, et des questions concernant la formation
distance devront tre prvues. Ces questions
pourraient porter, par exemple, sur la qualit des
systmes dapprentissage bass sur le Web et laccs
la bibliothque. La visite dagrment devra comporter
une rencontre avec des tudiants inscrits des cours de
formation distance. Il serait possible dutiliser cette
fn des installations de vidoconfrence.
2
Un environnement dapprentissage virtuel (EAV) est un systme conu pour
soutenir lenseignement et lapprentissage dans un cadre ducatif. Normale-
ment, ltudiant travaille sur Internet et lEAV fournit un ensemble doutils pour
lvaluation, la communication, le tlversement de contenu, le retour des
travaux de ltudiant, lvaluation par les pairs, ladministration de groupes
dtudiants, la collecte et lorganisation des notes des tudiants, des question-
naires, des outils de suivi, etc.
4.2 Issues primarily relevant to individual
course organization and delivery
1. Te robustness of systems to support students
2. Te support of project work, team work,
and access to laboratories
3. Te need to confrm the authenticity of
the student
4.2.1 The robustness of systems in support of students
Courses delivered by distance learning must be
underpinned by a sound delivery platform. Tere
must be evidence that the communications systems
in place enable interaction between students and
both their instructors and peers, so that distance
learning students are not disadvantaged by com-
parison with campus-based students. Tere should
be appropriate access to student, academic and
administrative services, and timely feedback on
assignments. Te platform may be a virtual learning
environment (VLE)
2
or similar system.

Visiting teams will require access to this platform,
and where appropriate in advance of a visit, as part
of the accreditation process. Greater emphasis will
be placed on the delivery and communications
systems, and academic institutions may be required
to provide more detail about this than is required
for campus-based courses.
Te views of distance learning students shall be
included in student feedback and questions about
distance learning shall be included. Tese may
cover, for example, the quality of web-based learn-
ing systems and access to the library. Tere must
be a meeting with some distance learning students
during the accreditation visit. It would be accept-
able to make use of video conferencing facilities.
2
A virtual learning environment (VLE) is a system designed to support
teaching and learning in an educational setting. A student will normally work
over the Internet and the VLE will provide a set of tools for assessment, com-
munication, uploading of content, return of students work, peer assessment,
administration of student groups, collecting and organizing student grades,
questionnaires, tracking tools, etc.

Annexe 6 Appendix 6
4.2.2 Soutien des activits de projet et du travail dquipe
et accs aux laboratoires
Dans certains cas, les travaux pratiques constituent la
faon la plus probante de dmontrer que les rsultats
escompts dun cours ont t atteints. Lquipe de
visiteurs tiendra compte dun ventail de faons de
dmontrer ces rsultats, faons qui ne se limiteront
pas ncessairement aux laboratoires de ltablissement.
Par exemple, les tudiants inscrits un programme
de formation distance pourraient tre en mesure de
satisfaire aux normes tablies par leur activit en milieu
de travail.
Il faut accorder davantage dimportance aux systmes
en place pour assurer le dveloppement dactivits
pratiques visant lacquisition de comptences, et les
universits pourraient tre tenues de fournir de la
documentation supplmentaire pour dmontrer com-
ment les cours de formation distance produisent
des rsultats axs sur les comptences. Cela pourrait
comprendre des lments de cours obligatoires donns
sur le campus.
La mme rigueur et les mmes normes sappliquent
lvaluation des travaux pratiques en milieu de travail
quaux cours temps plein dispenss sur le campus.
Des considrations semblables sappliquent aux travaux
relis des projets et au travail en quipe.
4.2.3 Ncessit de confirmer lidentit des tudiants
Des systmes robustes doivent tre en place pour
garantir que les travaux valus sont bien ceux de
ltudiant. Cela pourrait comprendre les mesures
suivantes :
Lutilisation de centres reconnus lextrieur
du Canada;
La tenue dvaluations dans des centres rgionaux;
Lobligation pour les tudiants dassister des cours
donns en rsidence ;
Des valuations orales et visuelles en ligne.
Les tablissements denseignement suprieur prennent
dj des mesures pour confrmer lidentit des tudi-
ants qui passent des examens, et des mesures aussi
rigoureuses doivent sappliquer aux travaux soumis
en ligne des fns dvaluation.
25 fvrier 2012
4.2.2 The support of project work, team work and
access to laboratories
Some learning outcomes for courses are most ap-
propriately demonstrated by way of practical work.
Te visiting team will consider a range of ways by
which this may be demonstrated that need not
necessarily be limited to campus laboratories. For
example, work based distance learning students may
be able to achieve the required standards through
workplace activity.

Tere is a need for a greater emphasis on the
systems in place to ensure that practical skills-based
activities are developed, and it may be necessary for
universities to provide additional material to dem-
onstrate how distance learning courses achieve the
skill based outcomes. Tis may include mandatory
on-campus course components.

Te same rigour and standards apply to the assess-
ment of work based practical work as would apply
to full-time campus provision. Similar consider-
ations apply to project work and team work.
4.2.3 The need to confirm the authenticity of students
Robust systems must be in place to ensure that the
work being assessed is the students own work. Tis
may include:
the use of recognized centres outside Canada;
holding assessments in regional centres;
students attending residential courses; and,
on line visual oral assessments.

HEI already make provision for confrming the
authenticity of students writing examinations and
similarly rigorous procedures must be used for
online materials submitted for evaluation.
February 25, 2012
75
Annexe 7 Appendix 7
les changements importants
Un changement important est un changement qui est
susceptible de rduire la conformit dun programme aux
normes du Bureau dagrment. Il y a de nombreuses mesures
qui peuvent afaiblir un programme agr et qui seraient
alors interprtes comme un changement important. Dans
le doute, demandez conseil au secrtariat du Bureau
dagrment au 613-232-2474.
Voici une liste non exhaustive dexemples de changements
importants :
1. Ajout dune option : loption la plus faible fera partie
du cheminement minimum.
2. limination de cours du tronc commun et de cours
obligatoires au proft de cours option.
3. Expansion ou modifcation de groupes de cours
option : lajout dun cours option en sciences du gnie
un groupe de cours option en sciences naturelles
afaiblira le cheminement minimum en sciences naturelles.
4. Llimination ou la rduction des travaux pratiques en
laboratoire afaiblira lexprience en laboratoire.
5. Une rduction du nombre de semaines denseignement par
session ou par anne est susceptible de rduire le contenu
du programme dtudes dans toutes les catgories.
6. Des modifcations aux politiques concernant les crdits
de transfert peuvent engendrer une perte dUA en sciences
du gnie et en conception en ingnierie qui peuvent tre
vrifes comme tant dispenses par des enseignants
titulaires du permis dexercice.
7. Modifcations aux ententes relatives aux crdits de
transfert/ententes avec les tablissements ou ajouts
dententes de ce genre.
8. Changements au niveau des enseignants des cours de
sciences du gnie et de conception en ingnierie qui
modifent le nombre dUA dispenses par des enseignants
titulaires du permis dexercice.
9. Rduction du nombre total dUA dun programme.
10. Changement de nom dun programme.
Fvrier 2009
on significant change
A signifcant change is a change that has the potential
to reduce the compliance of a program with Accreditation
Board criteria. Tere are numerous actions that can lead
to a potential weakening of an accredited program and
would be interpreted as a signifcant change. In case of
uncertainty, seek the advice of the Accreditation Board
Secretariat at 613-232-2474.
Below is a non-exhaustive list of examples:
1. Addition of an option: the weakest option will be on
the minimum path.
2. Elimination of common core and program compulsory
courses in favour of electives.
3. Expansion or changes of elective groups: adding
an engineering science elective to a group of natural
science electives will weaken the minimum path in
natural science.
4. Elimination or reduction of hands-on labs will
weaken the laboratory experience.
5. A reduction in the instructional weeks per term
or year can potentially reduce curriculum content
in all categories.
6. Changes in policies for transfer credit can result in
a loss of engineering science and engineering design
AU that can be verifed as being taught by specifc
instructors.
7. Change or addition of transfer credit/articulation
agreements.
8. Changes in the instructors of engineering science
and engineering design courses that afect the number
of AU taught by specifc faculty.
9. Reduction in total program AU.
10. Program name change.
February 2009

Annexe 8 Appendix 8
Politiques et procdures
de confidentialit
1. nonc gnral sur la politique
de confidentialit
Lagrment des programmes de gnie de premier cycle au
Canada est un processus qui se fait sur une base volontaire.
Ainsi, les dossiers et les dlibrations du Bureau dagrment
doivent demeurer strictement confdentiels en ce qui
concerne les activits et les dcisions dagrment. En outre,
le Bureau dagrment garantit tous les tablissements qui
prsentent une demande dagrment quaucun renseignement
leur sujet ne sera divulgu, lexception dune liste des
prog rammes agrs et des dates dentre en vigueur de la
priode dagrment. Il guarantit galement que tous les
renseignements divulgus aux personnes qui prennent part
au processus dagrment sont assujettis des mesures de
scurit afn dassurer leur confdentialit.

Lnonc de politique gnral stipule ce qui suit :
Nul renseignements rattach lagrment provenant du
Bureau canadien dagrment des programmes dingnierie
ou reu par ce bureau ne doit tre transmis ni rvl, par
crit ou de vive voix, par un membre quelconque du Bureau
dagrment, dun comit ou dune quipe de visiteurs du
Bureau dagrment, ni par un dirigeant ou membre du
personnel dIngnieurs Canada, un observateur du Bureau
dagrment, toute autre personne ou organisme, sauf ainsi
quil aura t expressment autoris .
Le prsent document dcrit les procdures que suit le Bureau
dagrment dans le cadre de ses activits dagrment en vue de
prserver la confdentialit.
Des restrictions sont imposes pour ce qui est des documents
du Bureau dagrment. Les particuliers qui ont accs aux
renseignements du Bureau dagrment sur lagrment font
galement lobjet de restrictions.
Les membres constituants dIngnieurs Canada qui reoivent
des renseignements touchant aux dcisions dagrment, tel
que permis par ces procdures, doivent avoir conclu une
entente crite suivant laquelle ces renseignements demeurent
confdentiels et ne seront pas divulgus, moins que les
membres constituants soient tenus par la loi de le faire.
Confidentiality: policies
and procedures
1. General statement on confidentiality
policy
Te accreditation of undergraduate engineering
programs in Canada is a voluntary process. As such,
the Accreditation Board requires that all records and
deliberations of the Accreditation Board are kept
confdential insofar as accreditation activities and
actions are concerned. Tis has been the policy of the
Accreditation Board since its inception. Furthermore,
the Accreditation Board guarantees, to each institution
seeking accreditation, that the Accreditation Board
will not publicly reveal any information concerning
the institution other than a list of accredited programs
together with the efective or dates of the accreditation
period and that any information disclosed to participants
in the accreditation process will be subject to safeguards to
protect its confdentiality.
Te general policy statement is: No information relative
to accreditation emitting from or received by the Canadian
Engineering Accreditation Board is to be transmitted or
revealed in writing or by word of mouth by any member
of the Accreditation Board, member of an Accreditation
Board committee or visiting team, Engineers Canada
ofcial or staf, or observer of the Accreditation Board to
any other individual or organization, except as specifcally
permitted.
Tis document sets forth the procedures the Accreditation
Board follows on accreditation activities in maintaining
this confdentiality.
Restrictions are placed upon documents of the
Accreditation Board. Restrictions are also placed
upon individuals having access to Accreditation Board
accreditation information.
Engineers Canada constituent members who receive
information about accreditation decisions, as permitted
by these procedures must have entered into a written
agreement to protect the confdentiality of any such
information and not to disclose it, unless required to
do so by law.
77
Annexe 8 Appendix 8
Remarque particulire
Le mandat du Bureau dagrment prvoit un mcanisme
dappel des dcisions du Bureau dagrment afn de refuser
ou de mettre fn lagrment dun programme menant
un diplme.
Le comit de rvision, tabli par le comit excutif dIngnieurs
Canada, tablira sa propre politique de confdentialit.
Toutefois, cette politique doit sinscrire dans la perspective de
lnonc de politique gnral, moins dindication contraire
en fonction des procdures judiciaires ultrieures.
2. Particuliers et organismes
2.1 Membres du Bureau dagrment
Le Bureau dagrment est compos de 15 membres
votants nomms par le conseil dIngnieurs Canada,
ainsi que dun secrtaire sans droit de vote (le directeur,
ducation, dIngnieurs Canada). Un membre du
comit excutif dIngnieurs Canada et un membre
du conseil dIngnieurs Canada sont des membres
dofce sans droit de vote du Bureau dagrment.
Pour viter les confits dintrt, ou tout autre genre
de confit, tout membre du Bureau dagrment
qui occupe une charge auprs dun tablissement
denseignement se retirera de la runion pour les
points lordre du jour qui ont trait lagrment
de programmes auprs de cet tablissement.
2.2 Observateurs aux runions du
Bureau dagrment
Tous les ordres constituants dIngnieurs Canada
et le Bureau canadien des conditions dadmission
en gnie sont invits dsigner un(des) reprsentant(s)
titre dobservateur, chacune des runions du
Bureau dagrment.
La Fdration canadienne des tudiants et tudiantes
en gnie, la Commission des titres dingnieur, les
signataires de lAccord de Washington et dautres
organisations pertinentes peuvent slectionner un
observateur, qui assistera chacune des runions
du Bureau dagrment.
Un membre dment nomm du Bureau dagrment
peut, titre de membre-lu, assister la runion
du printemps du Bureau dagrment qui prcde
immdiatement sa date de nomination.
Special note
Te Terms of Reference of the Accreditation Board provide
a mechanism for a formal review of an Accreditation Board
decision to deny or terminate accreditation of a degree
program.
Te Formal Review Committee, established by the
Engineers Canada Executive Committee, will establish
its own confdentiality policy. However, this policy must
be within the spirit of the general policy statement unless
otherwise required by subsequent legal action.
2. Individuals and organizations
2.1 Members of the Accreditation Board
Te Accreditation Board consists of up to
15 voting members appointed by the Engineers
Canada Board, and a non-voting secretary (the
Engineers Canada director, Education). A member
of the Engineers Canada Executive Committee
and a member of the Engineers Canada Board are
ex-ofcio non-voting members of the Accreditation
Board.
To avoid any confict of interest, Accreditation
Board members shall withdraw from the meeting
for those agenda items related to the accreditation
of programs at the institution where that Accredita-
tion Board member holds an appointment or
other confict.
2.2 Observers at Accreditation Board
meetings
Each constituent association of Engineers Canada
and the Canadian Engineering Qualifcations Board
are invited to send a representative(s) to serve as an
observer at each Accreditation Board meeting.
Te Canadian Federation of Engineering
Students, the Commission des titres dingnieur,
the signatories of the Washington Accord, and
other relevant organizations are invited to send a
representative(s) to serve as an observer at each
Accreditation Board meeting.
A duly appointed Accreditation Board member
may attend the spring Accreditation Board meeting
immediately preceding his/her appointment date,
as a member-elect.

Annexe 8 Appendix 8
2.3 Membres des comits et des quipes
de visiteurs du Bureau dagrment
Les membres des comits et des quipes de visiteurs
(en rgle gnrale le prsident) du Bureau dagrment
qui ne sont pas membres du Bureau dagrment
peuvent tre considrs comme membres temporaires
sans doit de vote du Bureau dagrment lgard des
points lordre du jour rattachs leur fonction. Ces
personnes peuvent, la discrtion du prsident ou du
secrtaire du Bureau dagrment, tre pries dassister
aux runions du Bureau dagrment. Normalement,
ces personnes peuvent assister seulement aux priodes
consacres aux points lordre du jour rattachs leur
fonction, mais le prsident du Bureau dagrment est
libre de les inviter titre dobservateur aux priodes
consacres dautres points lordre du jour.
2.4 Autres particuliers et organismes
La confdentialit de documents telle que dcrite aux
sections 3.2 3.9 (inclusivement) et les renseignements
quils contiennent doit tre respecte.
Les documents publics doivent tre traits de la mme
manire.
Les documents dusage ofciel seront traits comme
des documents dafaires courantes la discrtion du
destinataire.
3. Documents du Bureau dagrment
3.1 noncs gnraux
Tous les documents du Bureau dagrment sont
la disposition des membres du Bureau dagrment
et du secrtariat du Bureau dagrment.
Les membres du Bureau dagrment ou le secrtariat
du Bureau dagrment peuvent attribuer la
dsignation BCAPG CONFIDENTIEL
certains documents du Bureau dagrment lorsque
la situation le justife, ou la demande de la personne
qui a soumis le document.
2.3 Members of Accreditation Board
committees and visiting teams
Members of Accreditation Board committees and
visiting teams (normally the team chair) who are
not members of the Accreditation Board, may
be non-voting members pro-tempore of the
Accreditation Board for the agenda item(s) related
to their activity. Such members are invited to attend
Accreditation Board meetings by the Accreditation
Board chair or by the secretary at the Accreditation
Board chairs request. Normally they shall be in
attendance only for the agenda item related to their
activity but they may be invited to be observers
for other agenda items at the discretion of the
Accreditation Board chair.
2.4 Other individuals and organizations
Te confdentiality of documents as described
in sections 3.2 through 3.9 (inclusive) and the
information contained therein shall be respected.
Public documents shall be treated as such.
Ofcial use documents are to be treated as
normal business documents at the discretion of
the recipient.
3. Accreditation Board documents
3.1 General statements
All Accreditation Board documents are available to
Accreditation Board members and the Accreditation
Board Secretariat.
Accreditation Board members or the Accreditation
Board Secretariat may classify Accreditation Board
documents as CEAB CONFIDENTIAL if it is
deemed appropriate to do so, or when requested
to do so by the submitter of a document.
79
Annexe 8 Appendix 8
3.2 Documents rservs aux membres du
Bureau dagrment et au secrtariat
du Bureau dagrment
(mention BCAPG CONFIDENTIEL )
Manuel des membres
Procs-verbaux intgraux des runion du Bureau
dagrment (voir aussi la Section 3.5)
Ordre du jour et documentation intgraux des
runions du Bureau dagrment (voir aussi la
Section 3.5)
Liste de membres potentiels de lquipe de visiteurs
Rapports intgraux de lquipe de visiteurs
Commentaires du doyen sur les rapports de lquipe
de visiteurs
Commentaires du prsident de lquipe de visiteurs
sur les commentaires du doyen
Rapport reu du doyen en rponse une exigence
relative une dcision dagrment antrieure
Commentaires de la dernire quipe de visiteurs au
sujet du rapport susmentionn
Rapport du prsident du Bureau dagrment
lintention du doyen sur la dcision dagrment
Rponse du doyen au sujet des dcisions dagrment,
sil ne sagit pas dun appel ofciel
3.3 Documents transmis par le Bureau dagrment
au doyen
(Les documents transmis deviennent la proprit
du destinataire et portent la mention BCAPG
CONFIDENTIEL )
Le rapport rvis de lquipe de visiteurs
La lettre de dcision dagrment du prsident du
Bureau dagrment
Le doyen peut transmettre les renseignements contenus
dans le rapport rvis de lquipe de visiteurs et dans
la lettre de dcision dagrment du prsident du
Bureau dagrment sil le juge ncessaire. Le doyen
doit cependant au moins informer les tudiants et
le personnel du processus dagrment et du statut
dagrment du programme ou des programmes
en cause.
3.2 Documents available to Accreditation Board
members and the Accreditation Board
Secretariat only
(labelled CEAB CONFIDENTIAL)
Members manual
Unabridged minutes of Accreditation Board
meetings (see Section 3.5)
Unabridged agenda and attachments for
Accreditation Board meetings (see Section 3.5)
List of potential visiting team members
Unedited visiting team reports
Deans comments on visiting team reports
Visiting team chairs comments on deans
comments
Report received from dean in response to a
previous accreditation decision requirement
Previous visiting teams comments on above
report
Accreditation Board chairs accreditation decision
report to dean
Response from dean on accreditation decisions
if not a formal review

3.3 Documents transmitted from the
Accreditation Board to the dean
(Te transmitted document becomes the
property of the recipient and is labelled
CEAB CONFIDENTIAL.)
Edited visiting team report
Accreditation Board chairs accreditation
decision letter
Te dean is free to convey the information
contained in the edited visiting team report and
the Accreditation Board chairs accreditation
decision letter as he/she sees ft. As a minimum,
the dean must inform students and staf of the
process of accreditation and of the accreditation
status of the program(s).

Annexe 8 Appendix 8
3.4 Documents transmis par le Bureau
dagrment lordre de la zone de
comptence concerne
La lettre de dcision dagrment du prsident du
Bureau dagrment au doyen et lannexe.
Les documents soumis aux ordres sont assujettis
une disposition de confdentialit incluse dans
une entente conclue entre dIngnieurs Canada et
lordre concerne.
3.5 Documents transmis par le Bureau dagrment
aux prsidents dquipe de visiteurs et aux
membres, ainsi quaux observateurs
Mention BCAPG CONFIDENTIEL
Mention REPRODUCTION INTERDITE
RETOURNER AU SECRTARIAT DU BUREAU
DAGRMENT
Prsident de lquipe de visiteurs Visite venir
Rapport sur la dcision dagrment du prsident
du Bureau dagrment lintention du doyen au
sujet des dcisions dagrment antrieures. Ce
rapport peut tre accompagn de correspondance
pertinente et/ou dautres documents (p. ex., le
rapport demand par le Bureau dagrment, les
commentaires du doyen, la correspondance relative
aux dcisions dagrment, etc). Le prsident de
lquipe de visiteurs peut partager cette information
avec les membres de son quipe au besoin.
Commentaires du doyen sur le rapport rvis
de lquipe de visiteurs
Prsident de lquipe de visiteurs et membres
slectionns de lquipe Visite prcdente
Rapport reu du doyen en rponse une exigence
relative une dcision antrieure dagrment
Observateurs
Voir section 3.6 et 3.7
Accreditation Board to the association
for the relevant jurisdiction
Accreditation Board chairs accreditation decision
letter to the dean and attached appendix.
Te documents provided to an association are
subject to an obligation to maintain confdentiality
contained in an agreement between Engineers
Canada and the association.
Accreditation Board to team chairs
and members, and observers
Labelled: CEAB CONFIDENTIAL
Labelled: DO NOT COPY RETURN
TO THE ACCREDITATION BOARD
SECRETARIAT
Visiting team chair Forthcoming visit
Accreditation Board chairs accreditation
decision report to dean of previous accreditation
decisions. Tis may be accompanied by pertinent
correspondence and or other documents,
(e.g. Report requested by the Accreditation
Board, deans comments, correspondence related
to accreditation decisions, etc). Te visiting team
chair may share this information with team
members as the need arises.
Deans comments on the edited visiting
team report
Visiting team chair and selected team
members Previous visit
Report received from dean in response to a
previous accreditation decision requirement.
Observers
See sections 3.6 and 3.7
81
Annexe 8 Appendix 8
3.6 Procs-verbaux des runions du
Bureau dagrment
(mention BCAPG CONFIDENTIEL )
Les procs-verbaux non-approuvs (ceux qui
sont signs par le secrtaire seulement)
Les procs-verbaux approuvs (ceux qui ont t
approuvs la runion du Bureau dagrment sui-
vante et signs par le prsident et le secrtaire
du Bureau dagrment)
Membres du Bureau dagrment
Reoivent les procs-verbaux non approuvs ds
que possible aprs la runion du Bureau dagrment.
Les procs-verbaux approuvs sont conservs aux
bureaux des secrtariats dIngnieurs Canada et du
Bureau dagrment. Ces procs-verbaux sont fournis
sur demande aux membres du Bureau dagrment, et
aux nouveaux membres du Bureau dagrment.
Observateurs aux runions du Bureau dagrment
Les observateurs qui assistent une runion du
Bureau dagrment pourront consulter les dossiers
seulement pendant la runion; ils recevront un
ensemble abrg des procs-verbaux non approuvs
dans lesquels les dcisions dagrment ont t
supprimes. Les observateurs qui nont pas assist
la runion, peuvent recevoir sur demande, un
ensemble abrg des procs-verbaux non approuvs
(sans les dcisions dagrment). Dautres lments
confdentiels des procs-verbaux peuvent galement
avoir t supprims la discrtion du prsident et/ou
du secrtaire du Bureau dagrment.
3.7 Ordre du jour et documents des runions
du Bureau dagrment
LOrdre du jour prliminaire accompagne linvitation
la prochaine runion du Bureau dagrment. LOrdre
du jour fnal est distribu aux membres du Bureau
dagrment. Les observateurs reoivent lordre du jour
fnal et abrg, dans lequel les dcisions dagrment ont
t supprimes. Lordre du jour fnal, porte la mention
BCAPG CONFIDENTIEL .
3.6 Minutes of Accreditation Board meetings
(labelled CEAB CONFIDENTIAL)
Unapproved minutes (those signed by the
secretary only)
Approved minutes (those approved at the
following Accreditation Board meeting signed
by the Accreditation Board chair and secretary)

Accreditation Board members
Receive the unapproved minutes as soon as
possible after the Accreditation Board meeting.
Te approved minutes are kept in the
Accreditation Board Secretariat ofces. Tese
minutes are provided to Accreditation Board
members upon request and to new Accreditation
Board members.
Observers at Accreditation Board meetings
Observers in attendance at an Accreditation Board
meeting will have access to the dossiers during the
meeting only, and they will receive a set of abridged
unapproved minutes with accreditation actions
deleted. Observers who have not attended the
meeting may, upon request, receive the abridged
unapproved minutes with accreditation actions
deleted. Other confdential items in the minutes
may also be deleted at the discretion of the
Accreditation Board chair and/or secretary.

3.7 Agenda and attachments for Accreditation
Board meetings
Te preliminary agenda is distributed with the
invitation to attend the next Accreditation Board
meeting. Te fnal agenda is distributed to
Accreditation Board members. Observers receive
the abridged fnal agenda with accreditation
action items deleted. Accreditation Board agenda
are labelled CEAB CONFIDENTIAL.

Annexe 8 Appendix 8
Les documents qui accompagnent lordre du jour fnal
sont distribus aux membres du Bureau dagrment.
Les observateurs peuvent recevoir les documents
sur les questions qui ne touchent pas aux dcisions
dagrment. Les documents portent la mention
BCAPG CONFIDENTIEL au besoin.
3.8 Documents publics
Normes et procdures dagrment du Bureau
dagrment
Calendrier des tapes pour les visites dagrment
Manuel des procdures dagrment
Questionnaire pour lvaluation dun
programme de gnie
Modle de rdaction du rapport de lquipe
de visiteurs
Manuel du visiteur gnral
3.9 Documents LUSAGE OFFICIEL
Tous les autres documents qui ne fgurent pas
aux sections 3.1 3.7 ci-dessus
Accs slectif
Aucune mention de confdentialit
3.10 Destruction des documents confidentiels
Le Bureau dagrment exige que tous les documents
confdentiels (hormis ceux qui sont achemins
au doyen et les dossiers conservs par le secrtariat
du Bureau dagrment) soient dtruits de faon
approprie la fn de chaque cycle dagrment,
conformment aux procdures du Bureau dagrment.
Ces procdures sont donnes aux participants de
chaque agrment entreprise par le Bureau dagrment,
et peuvent tre rvises ou mises jour, le cas chant.
Attachments to the fnal agenda are distributed
to Accreditation Board members. Observers
may receive attachments that are not related to
accreditation actions. Attachments are labelled
CEAB CONFIDENTIAL where appropriate.
3.8 Public documents
Accreditation Board accreditation criteria
and procedures
Calendar of Events for Accreditation Visits
Manual of accreditation procedures
Questionnaire for Evaluation of an
Engineering Program
Visiting Team Report Template
General visitor manual
3.9 OFFICIAL USE documents
Includes all other documents not included
in 3.1 through 3.7 above
Distributed on a need-to-know basis
No confdentiality label
3.10 Destruction of confidential documents
Te Accreditation Board requires that all
confdential documents (except documents
transmitted to the dean and records kept by the
Accreditation Board Secretariat) be appropriately
destroyed at the end of each accreditation cycle in
accordance with the procedures established by the
Accreditation Board. Tese procedures are conveyed
to the participants of each accreditation undertaken
by the Accreditation Board, and may be revised or
updated as required.
83
Annexe 8 Appendix 8
4. Rgles de confidentialit aux runions
du Bureau dagrment
4.1 nonc de politique gnral
Nul renseignement rattach lagrment
provenant du Bureau canadien dagrment des
programmes dingnierie ou reu par ce bureau ne
doit tre transmis ni rvl, par crit ou de vive voix,
par un membre quelconque du Bureau dagrment,
dun comit ou dune quipe de visiteurs du Bureau
dagrment, ni par un dirigeant ou membre du
personnel dIngnieurs Canada, un observateur
du Bureau dagrment, toute autre personne ou
organisme, sauf ainsi quil aura t expressment
autoris.
4.2 Runions du Bureau dagrment
Les observateurs sont les personnes dsignes par les
ordres constituants dIngnieurs Canada afn dassister
aux runions du Bureau dagrment. Les reprsentants
du Bureau canadien des conditions dadmission en
gnie, de la Fdration canadienne des tudiants et
tudiantes en gnie, la Commission des titres
dingnieur, les signataires de lAccord de Washington
et dautres organisations pertinentes agissent
galement titre dobservateur.
Un membre dment nomm du Bureau dagrment
peut, titre de membre-lu, assister la runion
du printemps du Bureau dagrment qui prcde
immdiatement sa date de nomination.
Les membres des comits ou des quipes de visiteurs (en
rgle gnrale le prsident) du Bureau dagrment qui
ne sont pas membres du Bureau dagrment peuvent
tre considrs comme membres temporaires sans
droit de vote du Bureau dagrment, lgard des points
lordre du jour rattachs leur fonction. Le prsident
du Bureau dagrment peut, sa discrtion, inviter ces
personnes titre dobservateurs lgard dautres points
lordre du jour.
Le reprsentant du comit excutif dIngnieurs
Canada et le membre du conseil dadministration
dIngnieurs Canada faisant partie du Bureau
dagrment sont des membres dofce du Bureau
dagrment sans droit de vote.
4. Rules of confidentiality at Accreditation
Board meetings
4.1 General policy statement
No information relative to accreditation emitting
from or received by the Canadian Engineering
Accreditation Board is to be transmitted or revealed
in writing or by word of mouth by any member
of the Accreditation Board, member of an
Accreditation Board committee or visiting team,
Engineers Canada ofcial or staf, or observer of
the Accreditation Board to any other individual
or organization, except as specifcally permitted.

4.2 Accreditation Board meetings
Observers are those individuals designated by
constituent associations of Engineers Canada to
attend Accreditation Board meetings. Representa-
tives of the Canadian Engineering Qualifcations
Board, the Canadian Federation of Engineering
Students, the Commission des titres dingnieur,
the signatories of the Washington Accord, and other
relevant organizations are also observers.
A duly appointed Accreditation Board member may
attend the spring Accreditation Board meeting im-
mediately preceding his/her appointment date,
as a member-elect.
Members of Accreditation Board committees or
visiting teams (normally the chair), who are not
Accreditation Board members, may be non-voting
members pro-tempore of the Accreditation
Board for agenda items related to their activity.
Such persons may be invited to be observers
for other agenda items at the discretion of the
Te designated Engineers Canada Executive
Committee representative and the member of the
Engineers Canada Board of Directors designated to
the Accreditation Board are ex-ofcio non-voting
members of the Accreditation Board.

Annexe 8 Appendix 8
Les observateurs peuvent assister la totalit de la
runion du Bureau dagrment ou peuvent devoir
se retirer de la runion pour la priode ayant trait
aux points lordre du jour portant sur les dcisions
dagrment.
Les observateurs auront accs aux documents de la
runion, mais lesdits documents ne pourront quitter
la salle de runion sans la permission du prsident du
Bureau dagrment.
En ce qui concerne les discussions lgard de certaines
portions de points lordre du jour, un doyen ou un
reprsentant dment nomm peut tre prsent. Une
procdure distincte rgit ces activits et la prsence de
ces personnes aux runions.
Par vote majoritaire, le Bureau dagrment pourra
invoquer le huis clos pour toute partie dune
runion. Seuls les membres du Bureau dagrment
peuvent assister une scance huis clos .
Mise jour : novembre 2008
Observers may be in attendance throughout the
Accreditation Board meeting, or may be required
(at the discretion of the Accreditation Board chair)
to withdraw from the meeting for the duration of
agenda items related to accreditation actions.
Observers may have access to meeting documents
but such documents shall not be removed from
the meeting room without the permission of the
During portions of some agenda items, a dean/
designated ofcial may be in attendance. A separate
procedure governs the activities and participation
of such individuals at the meeting.
By a majority vote, the Accreditation Board may
move into closed session for any portion of a
meeting. Only Accreditation Board members and
the Accreditation Board Secretariat staf may be
present during a closed session.
Updated: November 2008
85
Annexe 9 Appendix 9
Conflicts of interest guideline
Conficts of interest are real, perceived or potential situa-
tions in which the judgments and actions of individuals,
institutions or other entities could be afected because of
multiple or competing interests. Such competing interests
can make it difcult for someone to fulfll his or her duties
impartially. A confict of interest exists even if no unethical
or improper act results from it. A confict of interest can
create an appearance of impropriety that can undermine
confdence in the person, the organization he or she repre-
sents or the profession.
A confict of interest may result in the Accreditation Board
making a decision that would not be in the best interest
of the engineering profession. Confict under this policy
shall be interpreted broadly.
What is defned as a confict of interest, or the perception
of a confict, can change depending on the circumstances.
Tis is to provide guidance but may not address every pos-
sible situation faced by a volunteer acting on behalf of the
Disclosure: All members of the Accreditation Board
shall disclose all conficts or perceived conficts of which
they are aware. Tis means that they will advise the
Accreditation Board secretariat of all institutions where
they have been a student, faculty or held (or applied
for) any appointment at any time in the past, including
professional collaborations/research, and will update that
information as required during their term(s) on the Board.
Visiting Team Chair and Vice-Chair/Alternate Chair:
Te role of visiting team chair and of the Vice-Chair/
Alternate Chair is such that a very strict interpretation of
what constitutes a confict will be applied and will include
a perception of confict. A person who has been a student,
member of the faculty or has held any appointment at
that institution will not be an appropriate Visiting Team
Chair, Vice-Chair or Alternate Chair for that institution.
Likewise if a person is the relative
1
of a student currently
enrolled in the engineering faculty at the institution,
1
For the purposes of this policy, relative means, related by blood, adoption,
marriage or common-law marriage (with a person of the same or the opposite
sex) or a person (of the same or the opposite sex) with whom a person has an
intimate personal relationship; it may also include an individual with whom a
person has had such a relationship.
Lignes directrices sur les
conflits dintrts
Les confits dintrts sont des situations relles, apparentes
ou potentielles susceptibles dinfuencer le jugement et les
actes de personnes, dtablissements ou dautres entits en
raison dintrts multiples ou divergents. Il peut alors tre dif-
fcile pour quelquun de sacquitter de ses fonctions de faon
impartiale. Un confit dintrt existe mme si aucun acte
non thique ni aucune irrgularit nen dcoulent. Le confit
dintrt peut crer une apparence dirrgularit susceptible de
miner la confance envers la personne, lorganisation quelle
reprsente ou la profession.
Un confit dintrt peut amener le Bureau dagrment
prendre une dcision qui ne soit pas dans le meilleur intrt
de la profession. Le confit au sens de la prsente politique
doit tre interprt de faon gnrale.
Le confit dintrt tel quon le dfnit ou la perception de
confit dintrt peuvent changer selon les circonstances.
Lobjectif est ici de fournir une ligne de conduite, non
daborder chacune des situations possibles auxquelles est
confront le bnvole agissant pour le compte du Bureau
dagrment.
Divulgation : Les membres du Bureau dagrment sont
tenus de divulguer tout confit, rel ou peru, dont ils sont
conscients. Plus prcisment, ils doivent indiquer au secrtari-
at du Bureau dagrment tous les tablissements o ils ont dj
tudi, enseign, occup un poste ou pos leur candidature
un poste quelconque, y compris pour de la collaboration
ou de la recherche professionnelles, et actualiser ces informa-
tions pendant toute la dure de leur(s) mandat(s) au Bureau
dagrment.
Prsident et vice-prsident/prsident supplant dquipe
de visiteurs : Le rle de prsident, de vice-prsident et de
prsident supplant dune quipe de visiteurs exige, de par sa
nature, que soit faite une interprtation trs rigoureuse de ce
qui constitue non seulement un confit dintrt, mais aussi
une apparence de confit. La personne qui a dj tudi, en-
seign ou occup un poste cet tablissement ne convient pas
pour le rle de prsident, de vice-prsident ou de prsident
supplant de lquipe charge dune visite cet tablissement.
De la mme faon, la personne qui a un lien de parent
1
avec
1
Pour les besoins de cette politique, on entend par lien de parent le lien de sang,
dadoption, de mariage ou dunion de fait (avec une personne du mme sexe ou du
sexe oppos) ou le lien avec une personne (du mme sexe ou du sexe oppos) avec
laquelle on entretient des relations intimes; peut aussi comprendre une personne
avec laquelle on a entretenu des relations intimes.

Annexe 9 Appendix 9
or a faculty member (or other), they will not be eligible
to act as Visiting Team Chair, Vice-Chair or Alternate
Chair.
Program Visitor/General Visitor: Conficts of interest
include: being a former student or employee of the institu-
tion or at an afliated organization; serving as a part-time
teacher at the institution, or at an afliated organization;
serving on an advisory body, governing body or investiga-
tive body within the last six years; being the relative of a
student currently enrolled in the engineering faculty at
the institution. However, for this role, the concept of
expired conficts may be applicable.

Expired Conict: Depending on the nature of the
potential confict, it may still be appropriate for the
person to act as program visitor if a sufcient amount
of time has elapsed since the situation giving rise to the
possibility of confict:
Bachelors or Masters degree, or Doctorate:
6 years
Serving on an advisory body, governing body or
investigative body: 6 years
Being a former student or faculty member: 6 years
Unavoidable Conict: Notwithstanding the guidelines
regarding expired confict, a particular individuals
confict of interest may be determined to be unavoidable
if, for example, the individuals qualifcations, knowledge,
and experience are particularly valuable to the accredita-
tion visit in question and the Accreditation Board is unable
to identify another individual with comparable qualifca-
tions, knowledge, and experience who does not also have
a confict of interest and who is able to participate on the
visit in a timely fashion. In that case, the confict must
be disclosed to the institution being visited, and consent
of the institution for that visitor to participate on the
accreditation visit must be obtained.
In any case of potential confict, fnal determination of the
persons eligibility to participate on the visit is made by the
Accreditation Board Executive Committee in consultation
with the Accreditation Board Secretariat.
Approved by Accreditation Board members:
March 1, 2011
un tudiant inscrit la facult de gnie de ltablissement en
question ou avec un membre du corps professoral (ou autre),
ne peut agir titre de prsident, de vice-prsident ou de prsi-
dent supplant de lquipe de visiteurs.
Visiteur de programme/visiteur gnral : Les confits
dintrts comprennent les cas suivants: tre un ancien
tudiant ou un ancien employ de ltablissement ou dune
organisation aflie; tre enseignant temps partiel cet
tablissement ou une organisation aflie; siger un comit
consultatif, un comit directeur ou un comit denqute de
cet tablissement ou avoir sig un de ces comits dans les
six dernires annes; avoir un lien de parent avec un tudi-
ant inscrit la facult de gnie de ltablissement en question.
Toutefois, dans le cas de ce rle, le concept dexpiration du
confit peut sappliquer.
Expiration du conit dintrt : Suivant la nature du confit
potentiel, il peut tre quand mme appropri que la personne
agisse en qualit de visiteur de programme si un dlai sufsant
sest coul depuis la situation qui a donn lieu la possibilit
de confit.
Obtention dun baccalaurat, dune matrise ou dun
doctorat : six ans
Membre dun comit consultatif, dun comit directeur
ou dun comit denqute : six ans
Ancien tudiant ou ancien membre du corps professoral :
six ans
Conit invitable : malgr la ligne directrice concernant
lexpiration du confit dintrt, le confit dintrt peut
savrer invitable si, par exemple, les qualifcations, les
connaissances et lexprience dune personne en particulier
la rendent tout particulirement comptente pour participer
la visite dagrment en question et que le Bureau dagrment
ne russit pas trouver une autre personne au bagage sem-
blable qui ne prsente aucun confit dintrt et qui peut par-
ticiper la visite la date prvue. Dans ce cas, il faut informer
ltablissement de ce confit et obtenir son consentement
quant la participation de la personne en question la
visite dagrment.
Dans tous les cas de confit potentiel, la dcision fnale quant
ladmissibilit de la personne participer la visite est prise
par le comit excutif du Bureau dagrment en collaboration
avec le secrtariat du Bureau.
Approuv par les membres du Bureau dagrment
le 1
er
mars 2011
87
Annexe 10 Appendix 10
Procdure consultative pour
llaboration des programmes
Introduction
Af n dof rir des conseils aux tablissements o de nouveaux
programmes de gnie sont en voie dlaboration, le Bureau
dagrment et son secrtariat ont tabli deux procdures :
valuation des programmes et visite informelle. Ces proc-
dures sont strictement dordre consultatif.
Ces deux procdures dcoulent dune analyse sur la faon
dlaborer de nouveaux programmes ; le type de programme
et le contexte de son laboration dtermineront les types de
conseils ncessaires. Voici des situations pouvant donner
lieu un programme :
Scnario
laboration du
programme
Discipline tablissement
1 Nouveau programme Discipline tablie cole tablie
2 Option devenant
un programme
Discipline tablie cole tablie
3 Option devenant
un programme
Nouvelle discipline cole tablie
4 Nouveau programme Nouvelle discipline cole tablie
5 Nouveau programme Nouvelle discipline Nouvelle cole
6 Nouveau programme Discipline tablie Nouvelle cole
Les scnarios 4, 5 et 6 peuvent inciter un tablissement tirer
avantage des deux procdures, alors que les tablissements des
scnarios 1, 2 et 3 peuvent nen avoir besoin daucune. Dans
tous les cas, le secrtariat du Bureau dagrment est toujours
disponible pour une consultation.
valuation des programmes
Un rapport du programme est soumis par ltablissement
aprs que le programme est approuv par la facult de
gnie et, de prfrence, celle du bureau des gouverneurs de
lUniversit. Le rapport sur le programme sera compos des
parties appropries du Questionnaire pour lvaluation dun
programme de gnie. Plus particulirement, des rponses sont
demandes pour les sections du questionnaire qui portent sur
lidentifcation de ltablissement et du programme, lanalyse
du contenu du programme et linformation sur les cours.
Selon llaboration de ce processus, un bref questionnaire
Program development
advisory procedure
Introduction
In order to provide advice to institutions where
new engineering programs are under development, the
Accreditation Board and its Secretariat have developed
two procedures; curriculum assessment and informal visit.
Tese procedures are strictly advisory in nature.
Tese two procedures have arisen from an analysis of
how new programs develop; the type of program and the
context from which they arise will determine the level of
need for advice. Following are possible situations from
which a program might arise:
Scenario
Program
development
Discipline Institution
1 New program Established discipline Established
school
2 Option becoming
program
Established discipline Established
school
3 Option becoming
program
Emerging discipline Established
school
4 New program Emerging discipline Established
school
5 New program Emerging discipline New school
6 New program Established discipline New school
Scenarios 4, 5, and 6 may lead an institution to take
advantage of both procedures, while institutions in
scenarios 1, 2 and 3 may not need either procedure.
In all cases, the Accreditation Board Secretariat is always
available for consultation.
Curriculum assessment
A curriculum report is submitted by the institution
after the program has been approved by the engineering
faculty and preferably after approval of the university senate.
Te curriculum report will consist of the appropriate
parts of the Questionnaire for Evaluation of an Engineering
Program. Specifcally, responses are expected to those
sections of the questionnaire that deal with the
identifcation of the institution and program, curriculum
content analysis and course information. Depending on the
further development of this process, a modifed short
modif peut tre mis au point. Linformation fournie sera
sufsante pour entreprendre une valuation du programme,
en particulier une analyse du cheminement minimal.
Une quipe de membres du Bureau dagrment examine
le rapport du programme et les conclusions sont prsentes
ltablissement par le secrtariat.
Visite informelle
Le secrtariat du Bureau dagrment peut aider les
tablissements organiser des visites informelles pour les
nouveaux programmes. Normalement, la visite a lieu lorsque
les premiers tudiants en sont la fn de la 2
e
anne ou de
la 3
e
anne du programme.
Le secrtariat fournit ltablissement une liste danciens
membres du Bureau dagrment qui il peut demander
dentreprendre cette valuation. Le secrtariat ne communique
pas avec les anciens membres. Ltablissement et lvaluateur
conviennent du moment et du format de la visite informelle.
Lorsque le format et lvaluateur sont choisis, le secrtariat
du Bureau dagrment leur fournit la documentation dont ils
ont besoin. Il peut sagir de copies du document des critres
et procdures dvaluation, du questionnaire dvaluation
des programmes de gnie, des rapports des quipes de
visiteurs, etc. Le rapport de la visite informelle est prsent
ltablissement par lvaluateur et nest pas remis au secrtariat
du Bureau dagrment ni prsent au Bureau dagrment.
Tous les frais de voyage encourus par lvaluateur
pendant la visite informelle (y compris, lhtel, les repas, les
dplacements ainsi que les frais accessoires) doivent tre pays
par ltablissement ayant demand la visite. Ltablissement
rembourse lvaluateur directement pour ces dpenses.
Dispositions gnrales
La participation la procdure consultative pour
llaboration des programmes est entirement volontaire
de la part de ltablissement ; les rapports des membres du
conseil dadministration prsentent des conclusions sur
les points forts, les points faibles, les proccupations et les
lacunes. Aucun jugement sur la probabilit de lagrment
nest port dans les rapports. Les personnes qui valuent les
programmes ne participent pas lquipe charge de
la premire visite dagrment du programme.
questionnaire may be developed. Te information provided
will be sufcient to perform a curriculum assessment of the
program, in particular, a minimum path analysis.
A team of Accreditation Board members examines the
curriculum report and the fndings are submitted to the
institution by the Secretariat.
Informal visit
Te Accreditation Board Secretariat can assist institutions
in arranging informal visits of new programs. Normally
this will occur when the frst students are in the Final-2
or Final-3 year of the program.
Te Secretariat provides the institution with a list of
former Accreditation Board members whom they can
contact to undertake this evaluation. Te Secretariat does
not contact the former members. Te institution and
evaluator agree on the timing and format of the informal
visit. Once the format and the evaluator(s) have been
selected, the Accreditation Board Secretariat supplies them
with any documentation that they require. Tis could
include copies of the accreditation criteria and procedures
document, the questionnaire for evaluation of engineering
programs, the visiting team report manual, etc. Te
informal visit report is submitted by the evaluator to the
institution and is not given to the Accreditation Board
Secretariat nor presented to the Accreditation Board.
All travel expenses incurred by the evaluator(s) during
an informal visit (including hotel, meals, transportation,
and incidentals) are to be paid by the institution having
requested the visit. Te institution will reimburse the
evaluator(s) directly for such expenses.
General provisions
Participation in the Program Development Advisory
Procedure is completely voluntary on the part of the
institution; the reports of the board members are fndings
of strengths, weaknesses, concerns and defciencies.
No judgment of the likelihood of accreditation is made in
the reports. Te individuals assessing the curriculum will
not participate on the team making the frst accreditation
visit to the program.
89
Le Bureau dagrment ne garantit pas sa capacit de rpondre
la demande pour lvaluation du programme mais fera tout
son possible pour fournir le service lorsquil est demand;
si la demande est leve, les membres sortants du Bureau
dagrment peuvent agir comme valuateurs des programmes.
Le Bureau dagrment prend la dcision ultime sur
lagrment. Nonobstant le fait que les personnes ofrant des
conseils sur les programmes peuvent tre des anciens membres
du Bureau dagrment ou que les personnes entreprenant
la visite informelle peuvent aussi tre des anciens membres,
aucune assurance nest donne quun tablissement agissant
selon les conclusions du rapport verra son programme agr
par le Bureau dagrment.
Te Accreditation Board does not guarantee its ability
to meet the demand for the curriculum assessment but
every attempt will be made to provide the service when
requested; if demand is great, immediate-past members of
the Accreditation Board may act as curriculum assessors.
Te Accreditation Board makes the ultimate accreditation
decision. Notwithstanding that the individuals providing
curriculum advice may be members or former members
of the Accreditation Board or that individuals conducting
the informal visit may be former members, no assurance
is given that an institution acting on the fndings in
the report will have its program accredited by the
Procdures sappliquant
aux valuations dquivalence
substantielle dIngnieurs Canada
Mise jour : Dcembre 2011
Introduction
Ingnieurs Canada est lorganisme national regroupant
les douze ordres provinciaux et territoriaux qui rglementent
la profession dingnieur au Canada. Au Canada, les disposi-
tions lgislatives provinciales et territoriales exigent que les
ingnieurs soient titulaires dun permis dexercice du gnie
de la province ou du territoire o ils comptent exercer. Ces
ordres, les membres constituants dIngnieurs Canada, sont
autonomes et chargs de linscription des ingnieurs dans
leur province/territoire. Bien quil nexerce aucun pouvoir
sur ses ordres constituants, Ingnieurs Canada collabore avec
eux afn dassurer le respect des normes les plus rigoureuses
en matire de formation en gnie, de comptences profession-
nelles et de dontologie.
Depuis 1965, lvaluation des programmes universitaires
de formation en gnie menant un diplme de baccalau-
rat au Canada est efectue par le Bureau dagrment. Ces
valuations sont ralises la demande des tablissements
denseignement qui dcernent ces diplmes. Sil rpond aux
normes dagrment, le programme reoit le titre de Pro-
gramme agr par le Bureau dagrment . Les diplms
de programmes agrs sont rputs rpondre aux exigences
de formation requises pour obtenir un permis dexercice du
gnie au Canada attribu par lun des ordres constituants.
En 1997, Ingnieurs Canada a largi le mandat du Bureau
dagrment pour y inclure lvaluation de programmes de
gnie dispenss par des tablissements trangers. Il sagit
alors dvaluations dites dquivalence substantielle .
quivalence substantielle
Lexpression quivalence substantielle signife que le
contenu dun programme et lexprience ducative sont
comparables ceux dun programme canadien agr, mais
que ces programmes ne sont peut-tre pas tout fait iden-
tiques. Cela laisse supposer que lon a raisonnablement
confance que les diplms possdent les connaissances
universitaires ncessaires pour commencer exercer leur
profession au niveau dentre.
Procedures for Engineers
Canada Substantial Equivalency
Evaluations
Updated: December 2011
Introduction
Engineers Canada is the national organization of the
12 provincial and territorial associations that regulate
the profession of engineering in Canada. In Canada,
each province and territory requires by law that engineers
obtain registration where they intend to perform engineer-
ing services. Tose individual associations are Engineers
Canadas constituent associations. Tey are autonomous
and are responsible for registration of engineers in their
province or territory. Although Engineers Canada has
no authority over its constituent associations, it works
co-operatively with them to ensure the highest standard
of engineering education, professional qualifcations and
ethical conduct.
Since 1965, evaluations of university engineering
education programs leading to baccalaureate degrees
in Canada have been conducted by the Accreditation
Board. Evaluations are performed upon request by the
institutions granting the degrees. If a program meets the
accreditation criteria, it is granted the label of Accredita-
tion Board-Accredited Program. Graduates of accredited
programs are deemed to meet the academic requirements
for registration with one of the constituent associations.
In 1997, Engineers Canada expanded the Accreditation
Boards mandate to include the evaluations of engineering
programs outside of Canada. Tese evaluations are called
Substantial Equivalency evaluations.
Substantial Equivalency
Substantial equivalency means comparable in program
content and educational experience. It implies reasonable
confdence that the graduates possess the academic compe-
tencies needed to begin professional practice at the entry
level, but such programs may not be absolutely identical.
91
Une valuation dquivalence substantielle suit les mmes
politiques et procdures que celles utilises pour lagrment,
mais aucune mesure dagrment ne sera prise, et on ne con-
clura pas non plus quun programme est en cours dagrment
ou quil sera agr la suite de cette valuation. Les termes
agrment ou agr sont rservs aux programmes
canadiens, tandis que les termes quivalence substantielle
et substantiellement quivalent sappliquent aux
valuations de programmes oferts lextrieur du Canada.
Ltablissement tranger qui souhaite quun programme soit
reconnu comme tant substantiellement quivalent doit
prsenter une demande expresse en ce sens au secrtariat
du Bureau dagrment dIngnieurs Canada, demande qui
sera ensuite transmise au Bureau.
Procdures
Pour quil puisse faire lobjet dune valuation, un programme
doit dj rpondre aux normes reconnues dans les forums
multilatraux, comme un nombre minimum de 16 annes de
scolarit avant lobtention du baccalaurat ou dun diplme
quivalent. En rgle gnrale, Ingnieurs Canada tudiera
les programmes oferts dans nimporte quelle langue, pourvu
que lon puisse fournir de la documentation en franais ou en
anglais et quun nombre sufsant de personnes responsables
du programme puissent sexprimer raisonnablement bien
dans lune de ces deux langues. La traduction et les services
connexes doivent tre de qualit sufsante pour permettre
une valuation adquate malgr les difrences linguistiques.
Documents pertinents :
Sauf dans les cas mentionns dans le prsent document
et lorsquil est ncessaire de sadapter la ralit locale, les
valuations internationales sont ralises en fonction des
normes et des procdures qui sappliquent lagrment des
programmes de gnie canadiens, dont la liste fgure dans
le plus rcent Rapport sur les normes et les procdures
dagrment.
Les procdures damorce du processus dvaluation
dquivalence substantielle et de formation de lquipe
de visiteurs sont nonces dans le prsent document. Les
documents pertinents sont les suivants :
1. Version la plus rcente des Normes et procdures
dagrment du Bureau dagrment (accessible dans
le site Web dIngnieurs Canada).
2. Demande dvaluation dquivalence substantielle
(formulaire accessible sur demande auprs du
secrtariat du Bureau dagrment).
A Substantial Equivalency evaluation will follow policies
and procedures similar to those used for accreditation, but
no accreditation action will be taken, nor will there be
any inference that a program is undergoing accreditation
or will be accredited as a result of such a review. Te term
accreditation or accredited is reserved for Canadian
programs, whereas the term substantial equivalency/
substantially equivalent is used in relation to evaluations
outside of Canada. In the case where an institution
outside Canada wants to have a program recognized on
a substantial equivalency basis, a specifc request should
be addressed to the Accreditation Board secretary, at
Engineers Canada, who will in turn submit the request
to the Accreditation Board.
Procedures
In order to be considered for evaluation, a program must
meet already accepted standards in multi-lateral forums,
such as a minimum number of 16 years of schooling prior
to the granting of an undergraduate level or equivalent
diploma. As a general rule, Engineers Canada will review
programs ofered in any language provided that documen-
tation can be provided in either English or French and that
a sufcient number of people in charge of the program
can express themselves reasonably well in one of these two
languages. Translation and related services must be judged
adequate to allow an appropriate review despite language
diferences.
Applicable documents:
Except as noted in this document and as necessary to adapt
to local conditions, international evaluations will be guid-
ed by the criteria and procedures for accrediting Canadian
engineering education programs as published in the most
recent Accreditation Criteria and Procedures report.

Te procedures for substantial equivalency process initia-
tion and formation of the visiting team are outlined in this
document. Te applicable documents are as follows:
1. Current Accreditation Board Accreditation Criteria
and Procedures (available on the Engineers Canada
website)
2. Request for substantial equivalency evaluation
(form available from the Accreditation Board
secretariat on request).
3. Questionnaire en vue de lvaluation dun programme
de gnie. Ce questionnaire dauto-valuation doit tre
rempli par ltablissement et renvoy au secrtariat du
Bureau dagrment au plus tard deux mois avant la
date de la visite sur place.
Un exemple de calendrier dtaill est prsent lannexe A
de ce guide. De plus, un exemple dhoraire de visite est dis-
ponible sur le site Web dIngnieurs Canada sous la rubrique
Documents complmentaires du Bureau dagrment .
Amorce du processus
Ingnieurs Canada recommande que ltablissement
denseignement organise, par lentremise du secrtariat du
Bureau dagrment, une visite prliminaire dun reprsentant
du Bureau dagrment, et ce, avant de prsenter une demande
ofcielle dvaluation. Le but de cette visite est de discuter
de toutes les questions relatives aux normes sappliquant
lvaluation dquivalence substantielle, la procdure
suivre pour la visite, aux documents ncessaires et dautres
questions. Les rsultats de cette visite prliminaire aideront
les parties dterminer sil y a lieu de procder une valua-
tion. Ingnieurs Canada peut aussi, sur demande, prendre
des dispositions pour organiser un atelier visant expliquer le
processus et indiquer ltablissement comment remplir la
documentation. Les cots lis une visite prliminaire et/ou
un atelier doivent tre tablis et accepts par les deux parties
avant la visite et/ou latelier.
Ltablissement denseignement qui souhaite faire valuer un
ou plusieurs de ses programmes peut en faire la demande par
crit auprs du secrtariat du Bureau dagrment dIngnieurs
Canada. Le secrtariat du Bureau dagrment consultera
alors le prsident du Bureau et le secrtariat du Comit
international, afn de dterminer sil y a lieu de poursuivre
la dmarche. La dcision fnale cet gard sera prise par
le Bureau dagrment.
Si lon dcide de poursuivre la dmarche, lquipe inter-
nationale devant reprsenter Ingnieurs Canada sera alors
constitue par le prsident du Bureau dagrment, en collabo-
ration avec le secrtariat. Le secrtariat du Bureau dagrment
veillera alors transmettre les renseignements pertinents
ltablissement daccueil et linformera quil doit remplir le
questionnaire dauto-valuation et le retourner au secrtariat
du Bureau dagrment, au plus tard deux mois avant la date
de la visite. Une proposition ofcielle indiquant les cots lis
lvaluation sera fournie ltablissement daccueil, qui
devra la signer avant que dautres tapes soient excutes.
Un modle de proposition est prsent lannexe A du
prsent document.
3. Completion of the self-study Questionnaire for
Evaluation of an Engineering Program. Te com-
pleted Questionnaire must be received by visiting
team members no later than two months prior to
the date of the on-site visit.
Note that a more detailed example of timelines is included
in appendix A to this guideline. In addition, a sample visit
schedule is available on the Engineers Canada website
under Accreditation Board Supplementary Documents.
Process initiation:
Engineers Canada recommends that the institution
arrange, through the Accreditation Board secretary, for a
preliminary visit by a representative of the Accreditation
Board, prior to submitting a formal request for a review.
Te purpose of such a visit would be to discuss any ques-
tions regarding the criteria for a substantial equivalency
evaluation, the visit process, the documentation required
and other issues. Te results of the preliminary visit will
assist the parties in determining if a review should be con-
sidered. If requested, Engineers Canada can also arrange to
provide a workshop to the institution on the process and
how to complete the documentation. Te costs associated
with a preliminary visit and/or workshop are to be agreed
upon by the parties prior to the preliminary visit and/or
workshop.
An institution wishing to have (a) program(s) reviewed
may request such review in writing to the Accreditation
Board secretary at Engineers Canada. Te Accreditation
Board secretary will consult with the Accreditation Board
chair, and the secretary, International Committee to rec-
ommend on whether to proceed further with the applica-
tion. Te fnal decision to proceed will be made by the
If the decision is to proceed, the visiting team going
on-site on behalf of Engineers Canada shall then be consti-
tuted by the chair of the Accreditation Board working with
the Accreditation Board secretary. Te Accreditation Board
secretary shall ensure that relevant information is given
to the host institution and shall advise that the self-study
questionnaire must be completed and returned to the
Accreditation Board secretary no later than two months
prior to the date of the on-site visit. A formal proposal out-
lining the costs related to the evaluation will be provided
to the host institution, and must be signed prior to further
steps being taken. Te template of a proposal is attached
as appendix A to this document.
93
Slection de lquipe de visiteurs :
Une fois quune demande prcise a t accepte, le prsident
et le secrtariat du Bureau dagrment proposent ensemble le
prsident et les membres de lquipe de visiteurs. La personne
choisie comme prsident de lquipe doit normalement tre
un membre ou un ex-membre du Bureau dagrment. Le
secrtariat du Bureau dagrment avise alors ltablissement
denseignement de la composition de lquipe. Dans la mesure
du possible, la slection sefectue partir de la liste actuelle des
valuateurs et membres expriments du Bureau dagrment.
Le secrtariat du Bureau dagrment veillera ce quaucun
visiteur ne soit plac en situation de confit dintrts.
Lquipe de visiteurs est normalement compose dun pr-
sident et dun vice-prsident, ainsi que dun valuateur de
programmes pour chaque programme valuer. Les pays qui
sont en train de crer leur propre systme dagrment pour-
raient demander que dautres experts en agrment, provenant
gnralement du Bureau dagrment, accompagnent lquipe
titre de conseillers ou de formateurs. Les cots connexes
la prsence de ces experts sont galement la charge de
ltablissement denseignement. Des services de traduction
seront ncessaires lquipe de visiteurs lors de lvaluation
du ou des programmes.
Documentation pralable la visite :
En plus de demander ltablissement de remplir le
Questionnaire en vue de lvaluation dun programme de gnie
du Bureau dagrment, on pourrait lui demander de fournir
des renseignements au sujet de ce qui suit :
les systmes denseignement primaire et secondaire
menant ladmissibilit aux programmes de gnie de niveau
universitaire, comme le genre de formation pruniversitaire,
les examens nationaux ou certifcats dtudes, etc.
les genres dtablissements denseignement postsecondaire
et le cadre dans lequel existent les programmes de gnie de
niveau universitaire, notamment la description des lois ou
des rglements applicables, les sources de fnancement et la
gouvernance, ainsi que les personnes charges de la prise de
dcisions
le cadre dans lequel volue la profession dingnieur, notam-
ment les lois et les rglements applicables, la gouvernance de
la profession, la reconnaissance des ingnieurs de profession
et les mthodes utilises pour faire respecter les lois
Selection of visiting team:
Following acceptance of a specifc request, the Accredita-
tion Board chair and secretary, will jointly propose the
visiting team chair and visiting team membership. Te
appointed team chair should normally be an Accreditation
Board member or recent past-member. Te Accreditation
Board secretary will advise the institution of the make-up
of the team. Whenever possible, selection shall be made
from the current list of experienced Accreditation Board
evaluators and members. Te Accreditation Board secre-
tary will confrm that there is no confict of interest for
any visitor.
Te team normally consists of a chair, a vice-chair and one
program visitor per program being evaluated. In situations
where the country is developing its own accreditation sys-
tem, the country may wish to request additional accredita-
tion experts, typically drawn from the Accreditation Board
membership, to accompany the team in an advisory or
training role. Te associated costs of these additional team
members will also be borne by the institution. Translation
services will be required by the visiting team when it is
conducting its evaluation of the program(s).
Pre-visit documentation:
In addition to the Accreditation Boards Questionnaire
for Evaluation of an Engineering Program, institutions may
be requested to provide information regarding:
the primary and secondary school systems leading to
eligibility to attend engineering programs at the univer-
sity level, such as types of pre-university education, and
national examinations/leaving certifcates, etc.
types of post-secondary institutions and the framework
within which university-level engineering programs
exist, including descriptions of applicable legislation/
regulations, funding sources and governance, including
decision-making responsibilities
the framework within which professional engineering
exists, including applicable legislation/regulations,
governance of the profession, recognition of professional
engineers and approaches to enforcement
Processus dvaluation :
Dans la mesure du possible, le prsident de lquipe suivra les
procdures qui sappliquent aux visites dagrment, en tenant
compte des difrences culturelles et du caractre unique de
ltablissement denseignement faisant lobjet de lvaluation.
Le processus dvaluation comprendra les tapes suivantes :
Ltablissement visit remplira un questionnaire
dauto-valuation.
Lquipe procdera une visite sur les lieux dune
dure minimale de trois jours, lissue de laquelle
lquipe prsentera un rapport verbal faisant tat de
ses conclusions prliminaires.
Un rapport crit sera fourni ltablissement dans les
quatre six semaines suivant la visite.
La visite aura lieu un moment qui convient la fois
lquipe de visiteurs et ltablissement daccueil. Le prsident
de lquipe, en collaboration avec le doyen de la facult de
gnie ou du reprsentant ofciel de ltablissement daccueil,
tablira le calendrier de la visite. Chaque visiteur pourra pren-
dre les dispositions de voyage qui conviennent le mieux son
horaire et son emplacement gographique, sans toutefois
engager de dpenses excessives pour ltablissement daccueil.
Le personnel dIngnieurs Canada et ltablissement daccueil
se chargeront de rgler toutes les questions de logistique.
Les membres de lquipe de visiteurs seforceront darriver
tt, la veille du jour o commencera la visite. Si cela est
impossible, nous encourageons les membres de lquipe de
visiteurs arriver deux jours avant la date du dbut de la
visite. Dans les deux cas, nous invitons les membres arriver
tt afn quils puissent sadapter au fuseau horaire.
Les membres de lquipe seront la disposition de
ltablissement denseignement pour prsenter des exposs
au corps professoral et aux tudiants sur des sujets relatifs
aux activits dIngnieurs Canada.
Des observateurs pourraient tre invits accompagner
lquipe de visiteurs, normalement dans le but de dispenser
de la formation, avec lautorisation du prsident du Bureau
dagrment et du prsident de lquipe de visiteurs. Le Bureau
dagrment, et non ltablissement, se chargera du fnance-
ment de ces observateurs, selon les besoins.
tablissement de lhoraire de la visite :
Ltablissement devrait tablir, pour la visite, un horaire qui
mette le mieux en valeur les points forts de son programme.
Lhoraire de la visite devrait gnralement staler sur une pri-
ode denviron trois jours, et prvoir du temps pour permettre
Evaluation process:
To the extent possible, the team chair will follow visit
procedures applicable to Accreditation Board visits with
due consideration given to the cultural sensitivities and
unique circumstances of the institution being evaluated.
Te evaluation process will include:
completion of a self-study questionnaire by the
institution being visited,
an on-site visit lasting a minimum of three days at the
end of which there will be an oral report by the team
to convey its initial fndings
a written report provided to the institution approxi-
mately four to six weeks after the visit.
Te on-site visit will be scheduled at a time mutually
convenient for the visiting team and the host institution.
Te team chair, in cooperation with the dean of engineer-
ing or equivalent ofcer of the host institution, will
establish the agenda for the visit. Each visitor will be given
the freedom to make travel arrangements that best ft his/
her schedule and geographic location without incurring
unreasonable expenditures to the host institution. Engi-
neers Canada staf and the host institution will make all
necessary logistical arrangements.
All reasonable eforts should be made by visiting team
members to arrive early the day prior to the visit start
date. If this is not possible, visiting team members are
encouraged to arrive two days prior to the visits scheduled
start date. In both cases, the purpose of early arrival is to
allow for adjustment to the time-zone change.
Team members will be available to make presentations to
the faculty and students on topics related to the activities
of Engineers Canada.
Observers may be invited to accompany the visiting team,
normally for international training, with the approval of
the chair of the Accreditation Board and the team chair.
Te Accreditation Board will fund such observers, as
appropriate; not the institution.
Visit schedule development:
Te institution should develop a visit schedule that best
demonstrates the strengths of their program in consulta-
tion with the visiting team chair. Te visit schedule should
be developed within a general framework of approximately
95
lquipe dexaminer le contenu des cours et de prsenter un
compte rendu verbal de ses observations, la fn de la visite.
De plus, lquipe de visiteurs aura intrt ce que :
a. la visite ait lieu alors que les tudiants sont sur place,
dans les classes et les laboratoires;
b. des visites soient efectues dans des sites satellites
pertinents. Le cas chant, la visite normale de trois jours
pourrait tre prolonge;
c. des rencontres en tte--tte aient lieu avec les membres du
corps professoral. On pourrait aussi prvoir des rencontres
en groupe, si lon dispose dassez de temps;
d. lon mette laccent sur les programmes de gnie de premier
cycle, et sur la faon dont les installations particulires, les
cours et les vnements contribuent, pour les tudiants de
premier cycle, enrichir leur formation en gnie.
Nous recommandons que llaboration de lhoraire de la
visite sefectue en consultation avec le prsident de lquipe
de visiteurs.
Personnes prsentes au compte rendu
des observations de lquipe :
la fn de la visite, toute lquipe de visiteurs devrait rencon-
trer le doyen de ltablissement (ou son mandataire), afn de
prsenter un compte rendu verbal de ses premires observa-
tions. Cette rencontre a pour objet dinformer le doyen des
principales constatations qui seront indiques dans le rapport
que lquipe soumettra au Bureau dagrment. Il ne sagit pas
de tenir une discussion ni un dbat, mais simplement de com-
muniquer les constatations de lquipe de visiteurs. Selon la
pratique en vigueur au Canada, seuls le doyen et au besoin
les chefs de dpartements assistent cette runion.
Rapports :
Dans un dlai denviron six semaines aprs la visite, le Bureau
dagrment fera parvenir ltablissement un rapport complet
des constatations de lquipe, comprenant les lments sui-
vants : les points forts et les points faibles perus, les aspects
qui sont conformes aux normes du Bureau dagrment et ceux
qui y drogent selon les membres de lquipe de visiteurs, les
aspects proccupants (autant pour le moment prsent que
pour lavenir), ainsi que des suggestions damlioration, le
cas chant. Ce rapport ne formule aucune recommandation
quant la dcision d quivalence substantielle du Bureau
dagrment.
three days, and must include time to review course materi-
als and for the team to deliver an oral presentation of the
teams observations at the end of the visit. Furthermore,
the visiting team will beneft from:
a. the visit taking place when students are on-site and
in the classrooms and laboratories
b. Visits to relevant satellite locations. If such is the
case the normal three day visit may be extended as
appropriate
c. one-on-one meetings with individual faculty members.
Group meetings may be scheduled if time permits
d. an emphasis on undergraduate engineering programs,
and how specifc facilities, courses and events contribute
to the undergraduate engineering educational
experience.
Consultation with the team chair during development
of the visit schedule is recommended.

Attendance at report of teams observations:
At the end of the visit, the entire visiting team should
meet with the institutions dean (or equivalent) for the
purpose of delivering an oral presentation of the teams
initial observations. Te purpose of this presentation is to
make the dean aware of all the major fndings that will be
included in the Visiting Team Report to the Accreditation
Board. It is not a discussion, nor a debate: its strict purpose
is for the visiting team to convey their major fndings. In
Canada, attendance at this meeting is typically limited to
the dean and, if appropriate, the department heads.
Reports:
Within approximately six weeks after the completion
of the visit, a complete report of the teams fndings will
be sent to the institution which will include perceived
strengths and weaknesses, areas of conformance to and
deviation from the Accreditation Board criteria as inter-
preted by the visiting team, matters of concern (both for
the present and for the future) and any suggestions for
improvement. No recommendations as to the Accredita-
tion Boards decision on substantial equivalency are
included in the report.
Le secrtariat du Bureau dagrment transmettra le rapport
ltablissement denseignement afn dobtenir ses commen-
taires et de sassurer que les renseignements fournis sont exacts
et complets. Ltablissement aura ainsi loccasion de signaler
les amliorations apportes pendant lanne universitaire en
cours. Les commentaires formuls par ltablissement seront
transmis au prsident de lquipe. Le secrtariat du Bureau
dagrment pourra communiquer avec ltablissement et le
prsident de lquipe de visiteurs, afn de sassurer que le dos-
sier du programme est complet.
Dcisions concernant lvaluation :
La dcision concernant lquivalence substantielle
est prise par le Bureau dagrment la lumire des renseigne-
ments obtenus dans le cadre de la visite. Pour en arriver une
dcision la suite dune visite, le Bureau dagrment tudie les
renseignements fournis dans le questionnaire dment rempli,
le rapport de lquipe de visiteurs, la raction de ltablisse-
ment au rapport de lquipe de visiteurs, toute correspon-
dance change en vue de fournir des prcisions, ainsi que
tout autre renseignement pertinent. Le prsident de lquipe
de visiteurs prsentera le rapport loccasion dune runion
du Bureau dagrment. Un reprsentant de ltablissement
pourra assister la partie de la runion o la dcision
dquivalence substantielle sera prise, mais ne pourra pas
assister aux dlibrations du Bureau dagrment concernant
ltablissement. Les dpenses engages par le prsident de
lquipe et le reprsentant de ltablissement denseignement
pour assister la runion du Bureau dagrment sont la
charge de ltablissement.
La lettre destine ltablissement pour lui expliquer en
dtail la dcision et les raisons la justifant sera prpare par
le comit excutif du Bureau dagrment. Le secrtariat du
Bureau dagrment prparera une lettre de prsentation
donnant plus de prcisions quant la dcision et expdiera
le tout ltablissement denseignement.
L quivalence substantielle dun programme est accorde
pour une priode dtermine, habituellement de trois six
ans. Ce statut peut tre rexamin pour un motif valable en
tout temps au cours de la priode. Le statut d quivalence
substantielle est accord si lon juge que le programme
satisfait aux exigences minimales ou les dpasse. Le nom de
tout programme auquel on accorde lquivalence substantielle
sera publi dans la version en vigueur du rapport du Bureau
dagrment intitul Normes et procdures dagrment ,
la section Programmes substantiellement quivalents .
Te report will be submitted by the Secretariat to
the institution for comment and reaction and to ensure
accuracy and completeness. Tis also provides an opportu-
nity for the institution to advise on improvements being
made in the current academic year. Any comments submit-
ted by the institution will be given to the team chair for
consideration. Te Accreditation Board secretariat may
communicate with both the institution and the visiting
team chair with the intent of ensuring that the program
dossier is complete.
Evaluation actions:
Te decision as to substantial equivalency is made by
the Accreditation Board as the result a discussion of the
information gained from the visit process. In arriving at its
decision following a visit, the Accreditation Board consid-
ers selected information from the completed questionnaire,
the visiting team report, the institutions response to the
visiting team report, any further clarifying correspondence
and any other relevant information. Te visiting team chair
will present the report to a meeting of the Accreditation
Board. A representative from the institution is permitted
to attend portions of the meeting where the substantial
equivalency decision will be made but the representative
leaves the meeting when the Accreditation Board makes
deliberations related to the institution. Expenses of the
team chair and the representative from the institution to
attend the Accreditation Board meeting are borne by
the institution.
Te letter to the institution detailing the decisions and
reasons for the decisions is prepared by the Accreditation
Board Executive Committee. Te Accreditation Board
secretary prepares a covering letter elaborating on the
decision and sends the package to the institution.
Substantial equivalency of a program will be granted for
a period, usually three to six years. Te period of substan-
tial equivalency will be subject to review for cause at any
time during that period. Substantial equivalency status
will be granted if current conditions are judged to meet
or exceed the minimum requirements. Te name of any
program granted substantial equivalency will be published
in the current version of the Accreditation Board report
Accreditation Criteria and Procedures in the section
Substantially Equivalent Programs.
97
Au moins un an avant la fn de la priode de reconnaissance
de lquivalence, le secrtariat du Bureau dagrment infor-
mera ltablissement daccueil quune nouvelle visite et une
nouvelle valuation dquivalence substantielle devront tre
efectues pour que la reconnaissance soit maintenue.
Confidentialit :
Les renseignements fournis par ltablissement denseigne ment
sont destins lusage exclusif de lquipe de visiteurs, du
Bureau dagrment et dIngnieurs Canada, et ils ne seront
pas divulgus sans la permission crite de ltablissement
concern. Les dclarations faites ltablissement sont
confdentielles. Les citations directes, intgrales ou partielles,
tires de toute dclaration sont interdites. La correspon-
dance et les rapports changs entre le Bureau dagrment et
ltablissement denseignement sont des documents con-
fdentiels, qui ne doivent tre transmis quaux personnes
autorises de ltablissement. Dans les cas o une politique
de ltablissement ou des lois du gouvernement exigent la
publication dun document confdentiel, la version intgrale
du document doit tre difuse. Quoi quil en soit, le Rapport
de lquipe de visiteurs ne doit pas tre rendu public, car il sagit
dun document de travail qui ne fait pas partie de la lettre
de dcision.
Diffusion publique :
Les noms des programmes jugs substantiellement quiva-
lents seront inscrits dans des documents publics dIngnieurs
Canada et communiqus aux parties intresses, au besoin,
tant que la priode de reconnaissance demeurera en vigueur.
La dure de la priode de reconnaissance nest pas publie
et constitue un renseignement confdentiel entre ltablisse-
ment et Ingnieurs Canada. tant donn que l quivalence
substantielle sapplique un programme particulier, toutes
les dclarations faites par ltablissement concernant cette
quivalence ne doivent faire allusion quaux programmes qui
sont valus comme tant substantiellement quivalents .
Tarifs :
Selon la politique dIngnieurs Canada, le processus
dvaluation en vue daccorder l quivalence substantielle
doit normalement sautofnancer partir des frais facturs
ltablissement qui prsente une demande dvaluation.
Dans le cadre de son mandat international, toutefois, la
recommandation du conseil dIngnieurs Canada ou la
demande expresse du gouvernement du Canada, il se peut
quune partie des cots soit assume par dautres sources.
At least one year prior to the end of the term of
recognition, the Accreditation Board secretary will advise
the host institution that a return visit and a substantial
equivalency evaluation will be necessary in order for the
recognition to remain in efect.
Confidentiality:
Information supplied by the institution is for the confden-
tial use of the visiting team, the Accreditation Board, and
Engineers Canada and will not be disclosed without the
specifc written permission of the institution concerned.
Te statements to the institution are confdential. Direct
quotations in whole or in part from any statement are
not authorized. Correspondence and reports between the
Accreditation Board and the institution are confdential
documents and should be released only to authorized
personnel of the institution. Wherever institutional policy
or government laws require the release of a confdential
document, the entire document must be released. In any
case, the Visiting Team Report must not be released to the
public as it is a working document and does not form part
of the decision letter.

Public release:
Programs deemed substantially equivalent will be listed
in Engineers Canada public documents and communi-
cated to interested parties, as appropriate, for as long as
the period of recognition remains in efect. Te length of
the recognition period is not published and is confdential
between the institution and Engineers Canada. Because
substantial equivalency is program specifc, all statements
made by the institution regarding substantial equivalency
must refer only to those programs that are evaluated as
Fees:
It is Engineers Canada policy that the substantially
equivalent evaluation process will normally be self-
sustaining fnancially from fees charged to the requesting
institution. Within its international mandate however,
either determined by the Engineers Canada Board of
Directors or specifc requests from the Canadian govern-
ment, it is possible that a portion of the total costs may
be borne by other sources.
On peut se procurer la grille des tarifs pour les visites
internationales, qui est sujette modifcation, en sadressant
au secrtariat du Bureau dagrment. Les frais comprennent
normalement les frais de voyage de tous les visiteurs, notam-
ment lhbergement, les frais de transport et les frais acces-
soires. Le transport arien sera en classe afaires et le transport
terrestre en premire classe. Ingnieurs Canada impose aussi
des frais dadministration pour couvrir les cots directs et
indirects de la visite. En rgle gnrale, ces frais sont de lordre
de 5 000 $ CAN par tablissement; cependant, du fait que
de nombreuses circonstances peuvent avoir une incidence sur
cette politique, les frais dadministration sont dtermins au
cas par cas.
Afn de se conformer aux lois de Revenu Canada, tous les
paiements doivent tre verss Ingnieurs Canada, qui se
chargera de rembourser aux visiteurs leurs frais de voyage.
Hospitalit
La visite du Bureau dagrment a pour but dexaminer les pro-
grammes de gnie oferts par ltablissement denseignement.
Lhospitalit oferte aux membres de lquipe de visiteurs
devrait se limiter aux lments essentiels de la visite. Il est
acceptable que ltablissement ofre chaque jour le transport
aller-retour entre lhtel et ltablissement, le djeuner du
midi le premier jour complet de la visite et le djeuner du
midi avant la runion de compte rendu des observations de
lquipe. Nous dconseillons aux tablissements dofrir aux
visiteurs des repas sophistiqus, des excursions non lies
aux programmes et des cadeaux.
Te fees for international visits can be obtained from the
Accreditation Board Secretariat and are subject to change.
Te fees normally include travel expenses for all visitors,
accommodations expenses, transportation and incidentals.
Airfares will be at the business class level and ground
transportation will be frst class. Engineers Canada will
also charge an administrative fee to cover the direct and
indirect costs related to the visit. Typically this fee is in the
order of $5000 CDN per institution, but as many circum-
stances may afect this policy, the administration fee will
be dealt with on a case by case basis.

To comply with Revenue Canada laws, all payments will
be made to Engineers Canada, which will, in turn reim-
burse visitors for travel expenses.
Hospitality:
Te purpose of every Accreditation Board visit is
to examine the engineering programs being ofered by
the institution. Hospitality extended to visiting team
members should be limited to essentials related to the
visit. It is appropriate for the institution to ofer transpor-
tation to and from the institution each day, lunch on the
frst full day of the visit, and lunch prior to the report of
teams observations. Elaborate meals, tours not related to
the programs, and gifts are discouraged.
99
Annexe 11-A Appendix 11-A
Annexe A : Modle de
proposition Visite dvaluation
Proposition - Visite dvaluation dquivalence
substantielle dIngnieurs Canada
[Nom du pays, Nom de ltablissement]
Anne du cycle de visites
Introduction
Ingnieurs Canada propose de raliser, la demande de [Nom
de ltablissement], une visite visant valuer lquivalence
substantielle des programmes [Noms des programmes].
Mthode
La squence dtapes proposes permettra Ingnieurs
Can ada, par lintermdiaire du Bureau dagrment, dobtenir
la documentation et defectuer les vrifcations ncessaires
pour prendre une dcision concernant lquivalence sub-
stantielle de ces programmes lors de la runion du Bureau
dagrment qui se tiendra [Nom de la ville] au mois de
septembre suivant la visite sur les lieux.
[Indiquer le nombre de visites qui seront ncessaires] visites
seront ncessaires lquipe de visiteurs. Il a t ofciellement
tabli que cette visite se tiendrait dans [Indiquer le dlai], plus
prcisment compter du [Indiquer la date].
quipe de visiteurs
Lquipe canadienne de visiteurs sera compose des
personnes suivantes :
Prsident de lquipe de visiteurs : [Nom]
Vice-prsident de lquipe : [Nom]
Visiteur afect au programme [Nom du programme] :
[Nom]
Calendrier des activits de la visite
dvaluation
La visite dvaluation sera efectue conformment au
calendrier suivant, qui est bas sur la disponibilit des
membres de lquipe de visiteurs et de ltablissement
[Nom de ltablissement]. Les dates ci-dessous ont t
confrmes et les derniers prparatifs de la visite sont
en cours.
Appendix A: Template of
an evaluation proposal
Engineers Canada Substantial Equivalency Visit - Proposal
[Name of country, Name of institution]
Visit cycle year
Introduction
Engineers Canada is pleased to conduct a substantial
equivalency visit at the request of the [Name of institution]
to your programs in [Name of program(s)].
Method of Approach
Tis sequence will provide Engineers Canada, through the
Accreditation Board, with the necessary documentation
and due diligence to make a decision on the substantial
equivalency for these programs at its meeting in [Name of
city] where the Accreditation Board will meet in September
following the on-site visit.
[Number of trips required] trips by the visiting team will
be required. It has been agreed formally that this visit will
take place in the [Timeframe], more specifcally from the
[Indicate date].
Visiting Team
Te Canadian visiting team will be composed of
the following individuals:
Visiting Team Chair: [Name]
Visiting Team Vice-Chair: [Name]
Program Visitor for [Name of program]: [Name]
Substantial Equivalency Schedule
of Activities
Te substantial equivalency visit will be carried out in
accordance with the following schedule, which is based
on the availability of the visiting team members and
[Name of institution]. Te dates below are confrmed and
fnal preparations are under way for the substantial
equivalency visit.
Appendix 11-A Annexe 11-A
Janvier [Indiquer lanne] : Demande officielle de la
part dIngnieurs Canada pour que la documentation
et les formulaires lui soient envoys
Ingnieurs Canada envoie ltablissement [Nom de
ltablissement] une demande ofcielle dinformation,
ainsi quun formulaire remplir.
Date [Indiquer lanne] : Rception, par Ingnieurs
Canada, du questionnaire dment rempli et de
la documentation demande
Ingnieurs Canada demande que la documentation
et le formulaire requis lui soient envoys ses bureaux
dOttawa, cette date au plus tard.
Date [Indiquer lanne] : Visite dvaluation
Nous avons commenc planifer la visite dvaluation,
et proposons le calendrier suivant pour lquipe de
visiteurs :
Date : Voyage vers [Nom du pays] et prparation de la visite
(prsident, vice-prsident et visiteurs de programmes)
Date : Ralisation de lvaluation au campus principal
[Nom du campus] (tous les membres de lquipe)
Date : Retour au Canada
Un horaire plus dtaill pour la visite dvaluation devrait tre
prpar lavance par ltablissement, en collaboration avec le
prsident de lquipe de visiteurs.
Date [Indiquer lanne] : Commentaires de la part
de ltablissement
Le rapport de lquipe dvaluation est envoy ltablisse-
ment plusieurs semaines aprs la visite. Ltablissement est
invit examiner le rapport pour dterminer sil est exact
et complet, et fournir ses commentaires. Ltablissement
est aussi invit dcrire les amliorations ou modifcations
apportes au(x) programme(s) depuis la visite dvaluation,
pendant lanne universitaire en cours.
Septembre [Indiquer lanne] : Prise de dcision
dquivalence substantielle par le Bureau dagrment
Le Bureau dagrment tiendra sa runion dautomne [Nom
de la ville] la date indique. Le doyen de ltablissement visit
sera invit soumettre un bref rapport rsumant les modifca-
tions apportes au programme depuis la visite dvaluation.
January [Year ]: Official request from
Engineers Canada for documentation and
forms is sent
An ofcial request for information and flling out of the
questionnaire is transmitted from Engineers Canada to
[Name of institution].

Date [Year ]: Engineers Canada receipt of
completed questionnaire and documentation
Engineers Canada requests that all completed forms
and documentation be submitted to the Engineers Canada
ofces in Ottawa, Canada by this date.
Date [Year ]: Substantial equivalency visit
We have undertaken some planning of the substantial
equivalency visit and are suggesting the following schedule
to the team:
Date: Travel to [Name of country] and Visit Preparation/
Review (Chair, Vice-Chair, Program visitors)
Date: Conduct main campus evaluation at [Name of
campus] (all team members)
Date: Return to Canada
A more detailed schedule for the evaluation should be
prepared in advance by the institution in consultation with
the substantial equivalency visiting Team Chair.

Date [Year ]: Comments due from the institution
Te substantial equivalency visiting team report will be
sent to the institution several weeks after the visit. Te
institution is invited to review the substantial equivalency
visiting team report for accuracy and completeness and to
provide comments and reaction. Te institution will also
be invited to comment on improvements or changes made
since the substantial equivalency visit which are being
implemented in the current academic year.
September [Year ]: Accreditation Board
substantial equivalency decision made
Te Accreditation Board will be holding its fall meeting
in [Name of city] on these dates. Te Dean will be asked to
send a brief written report summarizing any changes to
the program since the substantial equivalency visit.
101
La dcision dquivalence substantielle sera communique
par courriel ltablissement dans les jours suivant la runion
de prise de dcision.
Octobre [Indiquer lanne] :
Communication de la dcision ltablissement
Une lettre dtaille sera adresse ltablissement en octobre.
Cots
Les frais de voyage de lquipe de visiteurs vers [Nom du pays]
sont bass sur le transport arien en classe afaires depuis
diverses villes du Canada. Ces frais seront facturs au prix
cotant, sans majoration.
Il est entendu que tous les frais dhbergement, de repas et
de transit engags par les membres de lquipe de visiteurs
pendant leur sjour en [Nom du pays] seront entirement
pays ou rembourss par ltablissement [Nom de ltablisse-
ment]. Ingnieurs Canada ajoutera la facture fnale envoye
ltablissement [Nom de ltablissement] les cots des corres-
pondances destination et en provenance daroports
canadiens pour les membres de lquipe de visiteurs.
Ingnieurs Canada nexigera pas dhonoraires pour les
personnes participant cette valuation.
Ingnieurs Canada exigera des frais dadministration globaux
de 5 000 $ CAN [Nom de ltablissement] . Veuillez noter
que ces frais sont bass sur le(s) programme(s) valu(s) et
pourraient changer en cas de visites futures.
la fn de la visite dvaluation, au dbut de lt
[Indiquer lanne], Ingnieurs Canada prparera une facture
qui rsumera les frais remboursables engags par lorganisme
et par son quipe de visiteurs, conformment aux dispositions
susmentionnes. Cette facture comprendra aussi les frais
dadministration de 5 000 $. Le paiement pourra tre efectu
par traite bancaire internationale ou par transfert lectronique
de fonds. Ingnieurs Canada fournira sur demande les ren-
seignements bancaires ncessaires un tel transfert.
Vous trouverez ci-dessous un rsum des cots de transport
arien en classe afaires pour les membres de lquipe. Ces
cots sont approximatifs et pourraient changer, selon les
prix en vigueur au moment des rservations.
Les cots estimatifs de la visite dvaluation sont les suivants :
Te substantial equivalency decision will be communicated
by email within a couple of days of the decisional meeting.
October [Year ]:
Communication of decision to the institution
A detailed letter will be addressed to the institution
in October.
Costs
Travel for the Substantial Equivalency evaluation in
[Name of country] is based on business class airfares from
various locations in Canada to [Name of country]. Tese
will be charged at cost with no mark-up.
It is assumed that all hotels, meals and transfers for the
substantial equivalency visiting team members while in
[Name of country] will be paid for, or reimbursed by the
[Name of institution], with no cost to Engineers Canada.
Transfers to/from airports in Canada for the substantial
equivalency visiting team members will be added to the
fnal invoice from Engineers Canada to the [Name of
institution].
Engineers Canada will not charge honorariums for any
individuals involved in this evaluation.
Engineers Canada will charge a fat administration fee of
CAN $ 5,000 to the [Name of institution]. Please note that
this administration fee is based on the program(s) being
evaluated, and may change for future visits.
An invoice will be prepared at the end of the substantial
equivalency visit in the early part of the summer of [Indi-
cate the year], and will summarize the out-of-pocket costs
incurred by Engineers Canada and its substantial equiva-
lency visiting team in accordance with the above provi-
sions. Tis invoice will also include the $5,000 admin-
istration fee. Payment for the invoices may be made by
International Bank draft or via Electronic Fund Transfer.
Engineers Canada will provide the banking information
for the Electronic Fund Transfer upon request.
Te following is a summary of business class airfare costs
for the team members. Tese costs are approximate and
subject to change. Airfare costs may vary depending on
costs at the time of booking.
Te estimated costs for the substantial equivalency visit
are as follows:
Visite dvaluation [Nom du pays]:
Cots approximatifs Transport arien
1
:
[Ville], Canada [Ville, pays daccueil]
(prsident) = $
(vice-prsident) = $
(visiteur de programme) = $
Correspondances au Canada 5 x 75 = $
Correspondances au pays daccueil 5 x 75 = $
Frais dadministration dIngnieurs Canada = 5 000 $
Total estimatif des cots = $
Tous les cots sont en dollars canadiens. Les tarifs ariens
sont bass sur le trajet aller-retour en classe afaires. Les tarifs
comprennent toutes les taxes. Les cots de correspondance
ne sont que des estimations pour les taxis destination et
en provenance des aroports. Les cots indiqus ci-dessus
prsument que tous les frais dhbergement, de repas et de
transit engags par les membres de lquipe de visiteurs pen-
dant leur sjour en [Nom du pays] seront entirement pays
ou rembourss par ltablissement [Nom de ltablissement].
Il serait prfrable que ces cots soient pays directement
par ltablissement, plutt que rembourss ultrieurement.
Les frais de voyage des membres de lquipe pourraient
varier. Les cots susmentionns de _____$ ne sont que
des estimations.
Acceptation et approbation
Ingnieurs Canada demande ltablissement [Nom de
ltablissement] de signifer son acceptation et son approbation
de cette proposition en signant ci-dessous et en renvoyant la
copie signe, par courriel ou tlcopieur, Ingnieurs Canada.
Ltablissement [Nom de ltablissement] devrait galement con-
server dans ses dossiers une copie signe de cette proposition.
Acceptation :
Signature : ___________________________________
Date : ______________________________________
1 Comprennent, le cas chant, le transport ferroviaire et le kilomtrage.
Substantial equivalency visit to [Name of country]
Approx. airfares
1
:
[City], Canada [City, Country]
(Chair) = $
(Vice-Chair) = $
(Program Visitor) = $
Transfers in Canada 5 x 75 = $
Transfers in Country 5 x 75 = $
Engineers Canada administration fee = $ 5,000
Total estimated costs = $
All costs are in Canadian dollars. Airfares are based on
business class return. Fares include all taxes. Transfer costs
are estimates only for taxis to/from airports. Te above
costs assume that all hotels, meals and transfers for the
substantial equivalency visit while in [Name of country]
will be paid for or reimbursed by the [Name of institution].
Our preference would be for these costs to be paid directly
by the [Name of institution] rather than reimbursed later.

Travel costs for all team members may vary. Te above
costs of $_____ are estimates only.
Acceptance and approval
Engineers Canada requests that the [Name of institution]
indicate its approval and acceptance of this proposal by
signing below and faxing or emailing back a signed copy
to Engineers Canada. A second signed copy should be
retained by the [Name of institution] for your records.
Accepted:
Signature: ___________________________________
Date: _______________________________________
1 Includes train fares and mileage as required.
103
Lignes directrices sur les
valuations concomitantes
Contexte
De temps autre, on demande au Bureau canadien
dagrment des programmes de gnie daccueillir, loccasion
de ses visites sur place, dautres examinateurs associs
une valuation distincte (appele ci-aprs valuation con-
comitante ), en particulier lorsquune telle valuation aurait
lieu peu aprs la visite de lquipe du Bureau dagrment.
Ces valuations, qui peuvent tre demandes par des admin-
istrations publiques ou tre linitiative de ltablissement
lui-mme, peuvent faire intervenir des examinateurs propres
ltablissement ou de lextrieur, et comporter dautres aspects
qui excdent lvaluation normale du Bureau dagrment. Les
prsentes lignes directrices visent ofrir un cadre au Bureau
dagrment pour lexamen de ces demandes. Elles ne visent
pas aborder la prsence dobservateurs internationaux dans
les quipes dvaluation, ni la participation des signataires
de lAccord de Washington qui souhaitent surveiller les
visites du Bureau dagrment.
Principes
Dans ltude de cette question, le Bureau dagrment sinspire
des principes suivants :
Le Bureau dagrment souhaite collaborer avec les tablisse-
ments dsireux dtablir des valuations qui concident
avec les visites sur place du Bureau dagrment et qui
en bnfcient.
Le Bureau dagrment aura le dernier mot quant la
taille et la composition de lquipe charge de lvaluation
concomitante. tant donn que les visites sur place du
Bureau dagrment ncessitent beaucoup de temps,
deforts, de fonds budgtaires et de dispositions prendre
sur le plan logistique, le Bureau dagrment ne souhaite
surtout pas multiplier ni compliquer indment les disposi-
tions entourant ses visites pour consentir aux valuations
concomitantes.
Le Bureau dagrment entend sassurer que lquipe
dvaluation concomitante est distincte de celle des visiteurs
du Bureau canadien des programmes dagrment de gnie,
et que lquipe dvaluation concomitante ninfuence pas,
directement ou indirectement, les procdures, les constata-
tions ni le rsultat de la visite du Bureau dagrment.
Guidelines relating to
coincident reviews
The context
From time to time, the Canadian Engineering Accredita-
tion Board is requested to accommodate on its site visits
additional reviewers associated with a distinct review
(referred to herein as a Coincident Review), particularly
when such a review would otherwise occur within a short
time of the Accreditation Board Teams visit. Such reviews
may be required by governments or may be initiated by
the institution itself, they may include reviewers that are
internal or external to the institution, and they may entail
additional considerations beyond the normal Accreditation
Board review. Tese Guidelines are intended to provide a
framework for Accreditation Boards consideration of such
requests. Tey are not intended to address the presence
of International Observers on its Review Teams, nor the
participation of Washington Accord signatories that wish
to monitor Accreditation Board visits.
Principles
In its consideration of this matter, the Accreditation Board
is guided by the following principles:
Te Accreditation Board is interested in cooperating
with institutions that wish to establish reviews that are
coincident with, and beneft from, Accreditation Board
site visits.
Te Accreditation Board will have the fnal say on the
size and composition of the Coincident Review Team.
Since Accreditation Board site visits entail considerable
time, efort, budgets and logistical arrangements, the
Accreditation Board does not wish to increase or com-
plicate unduly its visit arrangements on account
of accommodating Coincident Reviews.

Te Accreditation Board wishes to ensure that the
Coincident Review Team is distinct from the Canadian
Engineering Accreditation Board Visiting Team, and
that the Coincident Review Team does not infuence,
either directly or indirectly, the Accreditation Board visit
procedures and the fndings and outcome of the visit.
Lignes directrices
Les lignes directrices qui suivent ont t tablies en tenant
compte des principes ci-dessus :
1. Composition de lquipe dvaluation
concomitante
Lquipe dvaluation concomitante exclut tout
membre du corps professoral qui relve du doyen
responsable des programmes valuer; tous ses
membres doivent tre indpendants des programmes
valuer et lvaluation ne doit pas les mettre en
situation de confit dintrts (selon linterprtation
du secrtariat du Bureau dagrment). Le nombre de
membres et le choix des membres de lquipe dvalu-
ation, qui peuvent faire partie de ltablissement ou
tre de lextrieur, doivent tre approuvs par le Bureau
dagrment, par lentremise du prsident de lquipe
de visiteurs du Bureau dagrment.
2. Documentation de ltablissement
La documentation transmise par ltablissement au
Bureau dagrment doit tre conforme aux exigences
du Bureau dagrment et ne comporter aucune modi-
fcation de forme ou de fond en raison dune valua-
tion concomitante. Ltablissement peut remettre la
documentation lquipe dvaluation concomitante
et laccompagner dun complment dinformation ou
de documents quil peut dcider de transmettre
lquipe dvaluation concomitante.
3. Runions
lexception des runions avec des tudiants, les
membres de lquipe dvaluation concomitante
peuvent tre prsents aux runions entre les membres
de lquipe de visiteurs du Bureau dagrment et les
responsables et les reprsentants de ltablissement
durant la visite sur place. Ils doivent se prsenter
ce titre aux runions et prciser le but de leur visite.
Ils peuvent participer pleinement ces runions
pourvu que cela ne compromette pas le calendrier des
visites de lquipe de visiteurs. La dcision en cette
matire est la discrtion du prsident de lquipe
de visiteurs. Les membres de lquipe dvaluation
concomitante peuvent dposer des commentaires de
dbrefage aux runions, et ils peuvent tre prsents,
la discrtion du prsident de lquipe de visiteurs,
Guidelines
Taking account of the above principles, the following
guidelines have been established:

1. Coincident Review Team composition
Te Coincident Review Team should exclude
any faculty members that report to the Dean
responsible for the programs undergoing review,
all its members should be at arms-length from the
programs under review, and they should have no
confict of interest in undertaking the review (as
may be interpreted by the Accreditation Board
Secretariat). Te number and names of all Coinci-
dent Review team members, who may be internal
or external to the institution, must be approved
by the Accreditation Board, acting through the
Accreditation Board Visiting Team Chair.
2. Institution submission
Te documentation provided by the institution
to the Accreditation Board should conform to
Accreditation Board requirements and not have
any modifcations in format or content on account
of a Coincident Review. Te institution may pro-
vide this documentation to the Coincident Review
Team, and may supplement this with any additional
information or materials that it may decide to pro-
vide to the Coincident Review Team.
3. Meetings
Except for meetings with students, Coincident
Review Team members may be present at all meet-
ings between the Accreditation Board Visiting Team
members and institution ofcials and representa-
tives during the site visit. Tey should be so identi-
fed at all meetings and the purpose of their visit
articulated.
Tey may participate fully in these meetings
provided that the Visiting Teams visit schedule
is not being compromised. Te decision as to
whether the schedule is being compromised is
in the discretion of the Visiting Team Chair.
Coincident Review Team members may provide
de-briefng commentary on the meetings, and they
may be present, at the discretion of the Visiting
Team Chair, at any in-camera and informal meet-
105
aux runions huis clos et aux runions non ofci-
elles de lquipe de visiteurs. Les membres de lquipe
dvaluation concomitante doivent sabsenter de la
runion au cours de laquelle lquipe de visiteurs se
prpare en prvision de lentrevue de fn de visite.
Toutefois, ils peuvent tre prsents cette entrevue
la discrtion du doyen.
4. Rapport
Il revient au doyen de dcider sil remettra ou non
un exemplaire du rapport de lquipe de visiteurs du
Bureau dagrment lquipe dvaluation concomi-
tante, de mme que copie de la rponse du doyen au
moment o elle sera soumise au Bureau dagrment.
5. Confidentialit
Les membres de lquipe dvaluation concomitante
devront signer une entente de confdentialit disponible
auprs du secrtariat du Bureau dagrment lgard
des documents crits et des dlibrations des runions
touchant la visite sur place du Bureau dagrment.
Lentente de confdentialit visant les membres de
lquipe dvaluation concomitante fgure en annexe.
6. Dpenses
Mme si le Bureau dagrment et ltablissement
assument leurs cots respectifs des visites sur place de
la faon habituelle, le Bureau dagrment ne rembourse
pas les frais de dplacement ni les autres dpenses de
lquipe dvaluation concomitante.
7. Rle du prsident de lquipe de visiteurs
du Bureau dagrment
Compte tenu de facteurs tels le nombre de programmes
valuer, la taille et la composition prvues de lquipe
dvaluation concomitante ainsi que ltendue et la
nature de cette valuation, le prsident de lquipe
de visiteurs dcide, aprs avoir consult le doyen et
le secrtariat du Bureau dagrment, de donner suite
ou pas la proposition dvaluation concomitante.
La dcision cet gard est son entire discrtion. Le
prsident de lquipe de visiteurs approuve la taille et
la composition de lquipe dvaluation concomitante,
et il peut formuler dautres exigences ou restrictions
en sus de celles des prsentes lignes directrices.
ings of the Visiting Team. Coincident Review Team
members shall be absent from the meeting at which
the Visiting Team prepares for the Exit Interview.
Tey may be present at the Exit Interview at the
discretion of the Dean.

4. Reporting
Te Dean will decide whether or not to provide
the Coincident Review Team with a copy of the
Accreditation Board Visiting Team Report and
a copy of the Deans Response at the time it is
submitted to the Accreditation Board.
5. Confidentiality
Coincident Review Team members will be required
to sign a Confdentiality Agreement available from
the Accreditation Board Secretariat with respect
to all written materials and meeting deliberations
that relate to the Accreditation Board site visit. Te
Confdentiality Agreement applicable to Coincident
Team members is provided in the Appendix.
6. Expenses
While the Accreditation Board and the institution
will cover their respective costs of site visits in the
usual manner, the Accreditation Board does not
reimburse travel or other out-of-pocket expenses
of the Coincident Review Team.
7. Accreditation Board Visiting Team Chair role
Taking account of such factors as the number
of programs being reviewed, the intended size
and composition of the Coincident Review Team
and the extent and nature of the Coincident
Review, the Visiting Team Chair, in consultation
with the Dean and the Accreditation Board Secre-
tariat, decides on whether or not to accommodate
a proposed Coincident Review. Te decision to
accommodate the proposed Coincident Review is
within the discretion of the Visiting Team Chair.
Te Accreditation Board Visiting Team Chair ap-
proves the size and composition of the Coincident
Review Team, and may issue additional require-
ments or restrictions beyond those contained in
these Guidelines.
Procdures
1. La demande initiale dvaluation concomitante est
prsente par le doyen au secrtariat du Bureau dagrment,
paralllement la demande dagrment dment remplie.
Celle-ci prcise la nature de lvaluation concomitante,
son mandat et elle peut proposer les noms, le nombre et les
catgories de membres de lquipe qui sera charge de cette
valuation. Ces renseignements sont transmis sur-le-champ
au prsident de lquipe de visiteurs ds que lapprobation
de la nomination de ce dernier a t communique au
secrtariat du Bureau dagrment.
2. Le prsident de lquipe de visiteurs communique
alors avec le doyen, et dans les trois semaines qui suivent
la rception de la demande, il lui rpond, avec copie con-
forme au secrtariat du Bureau dagrment, en indiquant
sil consent donner suite la proposition dvaluation
concomitante. Le prsident de lquipe de visiteurs du
Bureau dagrment approuve la taille et la composition
dfnitives de lquipe dvaluation concomitante, et
indique dautres exigences ou restrictions en sus de celles
des prsentes lignes directrices, le cas chant.
3. Ensuite, le doyen crit aux membres de lquipe
dvaluation concomitante, avec copie conforme au
prsident de lquipe de visiteurs du Bureau dagrment,
pour leur confrmer leur nomination et leur fournir les
prsentes lignes directrices, accompagnes des autres
exigences ou restrictions que pourrait imposer le prsident
de lquipe de visiteurs du Bureau dagrment.
4. Le prsident de lquipe de visiteurs et le doyen fxent
de la faon habituelle le calendrier dtaill de la visite
en y intgrant la participation de lquipe dvaluation
concomitante.
Approuv par le Bureau dagrment le 23 fvrier 2013.
Procedures
1. Te initial request for a Coincident Review is made
by the Dean to the Accreditation Board Secretariat at
the same time as the Dean submits a completed Request
for Accreditation. Te request should identify the nature
of the Coincident Review, it should provide the Terms
of Reference of the Coincident Review, and it may
propose the names, numbers and categories of members
of the Coincident Review Team. Tis information is
conveyed immediately to the Visiting Team Chair once
approval of the Visiting Team Chair selection has been
received by the Secretariat.
2. Te Visiting Team Chair then confers with the
Dean, and within three weeks of receiving the request
responds to the Dean, copied to the Accreditation Board
Secretariat, indicating a decision as to whether or not
the proposed Coincident Review can be accommodated.
Te Accreditation Board Visiting Team Chair approves
the fnal size and composition of the Coincident Review
Team, and indicates additional requirements or restric-
tions beyond those in these Guidelines, if any.
3. Te Dean then writes to the Coincident Review Team
members, copied to the Accreditation Board Visiting
Team Chair, to confrm their appointments and to
provide them with these Guidelines, along with any
additional requirements or restrictions that the Accredi-
tation Board Visiting Team Chair may require.
4. Te detailed visit schedule incorporating the Coincident
Review Team is established between the Accreditation
Board Visiting Team Chair and the Dean in the normal
way, but taking account of the participation of the
Coincident Review Team.
Approved by the Accreditation Board, February 23, 2013.
107
Entente de confidentialit de lquipe
dvaluation concomitante
Le rle de lquipe de visiteurs consiste recueillir de linformation
pour le compte du Bureau canadien des programmes dagrment
de gnie (le Bureau dagrment) au sujet des programmes de gnie
et produire un rapport sur les aspects qualitatifs et quantitatifs
des programmes en relevant les enjeux susceptibles dintresser le
Bureau dagrment. Le rle de lquipe dvaluation concomitante est
daccompagner lquipe de visiteurs durant la visite dagrment et de
produire un rapport indpendant qui sera remis ltablissement ou
un organisme gouvernemental. Dans le cadre de leurs travaux, les
membres de lquipe dvaluation concomitante prennent connaissance
de renseignements confidentiels et, en signant la prsente entente, ils
conviennent de prserver la confidentialit du processus.
Confidentialit
Je sais que, en qualit de membre de lquipe dvaluation
concomitante, jaurai accs des documents et des
renseignements confidentiels. cet gard :
Je respecterai la confidentialit de tout document et de toute
information dont je prendrai connaissance avant, pendant et
aprs la visite et la production du rapport.
Je prendrai connaissance des renseignements confidentiels
transmis par le Bureau dagrment et ltablissement dont les
programmes sont en cours dagrment uniquement aux fins
du rapport de lvaluation concomitante.
Pour assurer la confidentialit de lagrment et des documents
dvaluation, jassumerai en outre la responsabilit de dtruire
(dchiqueter les copies papier, supprimer les versions lectroniques)
tout document confidentiel ds que le rapport de lvaluation
concomitante aura t rdig.
Privilge et proprit intellectuelle
Je sais que les documents produits dans le cadre dune valuation
dagrment contiennent de linformation privilgie et quil mest
uniquement possible de les utiliser pour maider prparer le rapport
de lvaluation concomitante. Je consens ne pas reproduire, diffuser
ni distribuer quelque document que ce soit dautres personnes que
les membres de lquipe dvaluation concomitante et de lquipe
de visiteurs.
______________________________________
Signature du membre
______________________________________
Nom du membre en majuscules
______________________________________
Date
Coincident Review Team
confidentiality agreement
The role of the Visiting Team is to gather information on behalf of
the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (the Accreditation
Board) about engineering programs and to provide a report on the
qualitative and quantitative aspects of programs identifying issues
that may be of interest to the Accreditation Board. The role of the
Coincident Review Team is to accompany the Visiting Team during
the accreditation visit process and to provide an independent report
to the institution and/or to a government body. In the course of
their work, Coincident Review Team members access confidential
information and by signing this agreement they agree to maintain
the confidentiality of the process.
Confidentiality
I understand that, as a member of the Coincident Review Team,
I will have access to confidential material and information.
In respect of that:
I will respect the confidentiality of any materials and information
that I deal with at all times before, during and after the visit and
reporting process.
I will access confidential information provided by the Accredita-
tion Board and by the institution whose programs are being
accredited only as needed for the purposes of the Coincident
Review report.
In order to ensure the confidentiality of the accreditation and
review materials, I will also assume responsibility for dispos-
ing (i.e. shredding hard copies, deleting electronic versions) of
any confidential materials once the disposition of the Coincident
Review report has been completed.
Privilege and intellectual property
I understand that documents produced in the course of an
accreditation review contain information that is privileged, and
I may only use these documents to assist in the preparation of
the Coincident Review Report. I agree not to copy, disseminate
or distribute any of the materials beyond the members of the
Coincident Review and Visiting Teams.
______________________________________
Signature of member
______________________________________
Print name of member
______________________________________
Date
Procdures de rvision officielle
dune dcision de refus dagrment
rendue par le Bureau dagrment
1. Renseignements gnraux
Dans lventualit dune dcision du Bureau dagrment
de refuser lagrment dun programme ou de mettre fn
lagrment dun programme agr, le Bureau dagrment,
la demande de ltablissement, examinera les options dont
ce dernier peut se prvaloir quant au processus dagrment
et le renseignera cet gard. Ltablissement a en efet la
possibilit de prsenter une demande de rvision ofcielle
de la dcision ou une demande de nouvelle visite anticipe.
Ltablissement ne peut nanmoins choisir quune de ces
deux options. Ce document traite des procdures suivre
dans le cas dune demande de rvision ofcielle.
2. Demande de rvision officielle
Ltablissement peut prsenter, par crit, une demande afn
quune rvision ofcielle soit efectue. Cette demande doit
parvenir au chef de la direction dIngnieurs Canada dans
les 60 jours de la rception de lavis concernant les mesures
dagrment prises par le Bureau dagrment. Afn de faciliter
la rponse du Bureau dagrment, la demande de rvision
ofcielle doit indiquer les aspects de la lettre de dcision
dagrment propos desquels ltablissement dsire dautres
claircissements ou au sujet desquels ltablissement de-
mande une rvision. Sur rception de cette demande, le chef
de la direction dIngnieurs Canada fxe une runion entre
les reprsentants appropris du Bureau dagrment et de
ltablissement, afn de faire comprendre clairement les raisons
pour lesquelles a t prise la dcision de ne pas accorder
lagrment. Dans les 14 jours qui suivent la tenue de cette
runion, ltablissement doit confrmer ou retirer sa demande
de rvision ofcielle par crit auprs du chef de la direction
dIngnieurs Canada.
Si ltablissement confrme sa dcision de maintenir sa de-
mande de rvision ofcielle, le chef de la direction dIngnieurs
Canada poursuit le processus de rvision ofcielle.
Le chef de la direction tiendra lordre constituant dIngnieurs
Canada reprsentant la province ou le territoire o se trouve
ltablissement au courant du processus de rvision ofcielle.
Sil retire sa demande de rvision ofcielle, mais quil souhaite
une nouvelle visite anticipe, ltablissement doit en faire la
demande en mme temps quil prsente son avis de retrait.
Procedures for formal review
of an Accreditation Board
decision to deny accreditation
1. General
In the event of a decision by the Accreditation Board
to deny accreditation of a program or to terminate the
accreditation of an accredited program, the Accreditation
Board, if requested by the institution, will review and
clarify for the institution the options with respect to the
accreditation process. As one of the options, the institution
may request a formal review of the decision. Te other
option is a request for an early re-visit. An institution
must select one option only. Tis document deals with
the procedures to be followed where the institution selects
the formal review option.
2. Request for formal review
Te institution may submit a written request that a
formal review be initiated. Tis request must be received
by the chief executive ofcer, principal executive ofcer of
Engineers Canada, within 30 days of notifcation of the ac-
creditation action of the Accreditation Board. To facilitate
a response from the Accreditation Board, the request for a
formal review must identify the points in the accreditation
decision letter for which the institution requires further
clarifcation or which the institution wishes to have
reviewed. Upon receipt of such request, the chief executive
ofcer of Engineers Canada arranges a meeting between
appropriate representatives of the Accreditation Board and
the institution to ensure that there is opportunity for the
reasons for the decision not to accredit to be fully under-
stood. Within 14 days of the date of conclusion of this
meeting, the institution must either confrm or withdraw
in writing to the chief executive ofcer of Engineers
Canada its request for a formal review.
If the institution confrms its decision to proceed with its
request for a formal review, the chief executive ofcer of
Engineers Canada will continue with the formal review.
Te chief executive ofcer of Engineers Canada will keep
the relevant constituent association of Engineers Canada
representing the province or territory in which the institu-
tion is located apprised of the process of formal review. If
the institution withdraws its request for a formal review, but
desires an early re-visit, it must request the early re-visit at
the time of the withdrawal of the request for formal review.
109
3. Comit permanent de rvision officielle
Le dossier de rvision ofcielle est tudi par un comit
de rvision compos des membres suivants :
Le membre par ordre hirarchique
1
, sans confit dintrt,
du Comit des examinateurs/des exigences en matire de
formation universitaire dordre constituant reprsentant
la province ou le territoire o est situ ltablissement
(cette personne prsidera le comit de rvision).
Le dernier prsident sortant du Bureau dagrment,
sans confit dintrt, qui ne sige plus au Bureau.
Le membre par ordre hirarchique, sans confit dintrt,
du Bureau canadien des conditions dadmission en gnie.
Les membres du Comit doivent tre en mesure dagir
sans prjugs et de faon impartiale. Ils ne doivent pas avoir
de confits dintrt, rels ou apparents, ni avoir collabor
rcemment avec ltablissement (ou avec sa facult de gnie).
Ils ne doivent pas avoir particip directement llaboration
ni lenseignement du programme en question, ni au proces-
sus de prise de dcision dagrment. Tous les membres du
Comit de rvision doivent tre des ingnieurs titulaires dun
permis au Canada. Ltablissement et le comit excutif du
Bureau dagrment peuvent sopposer, pour des raisons de
confit dintrt, la nomination dun membre du Comit
de rvision. La dcision quant cette opposition est prise
par le comit excutif dIngnieurs Canada et elle est fnale
et sans appel.
Une fois le Comit de rvision tabli, le chef de la direction
dIngnieurs Canada fxe une date et un lieu acceptables pour
la tenue de laudience. Laudience a lieu dans les 90 jours
qui suivent la rception de la confrmation, de la part de
ltablissement, de maintenir sa demande de rvision
ofcielle.
4. Rvision officielle
Le chef de la direction dIngnieurs Canada doit recev-
oir, au moins 30 jours avant la date fxe pour laudience,
un document exposant en dtail les motifs pour lesquels
ltablissement demande une rvision ofcielle, et ce, afn
que le Comit de rvision et le Bureau dagrmentpuissent
disposer de ces renseignements avant la tenue de laudience.
1
Prsident, vice-prsident, prsident sortant ou lun des membres par ordre
danciennet, disponible pour siger au Comit de rvision.
3. Standing committee for formal review
Te formal review case will be considered by a review
committee comprised of:
Te ranking member
1
, without confict, of the Board
of Examiners/Academic Requirements Committee for
the constituent association representing the province
or territory in which the institution is located (this
individual will chair the review committee);
Te most recent past-chair of the Accreditation Board,
without confict, who is no longer serving on the board;
and
Te ranking member, without confict, of the Canadian
Engineering Qualifcations Board.
Committee members must be able to act in an unbiased
and impartial manner. Tey must have no real or apparent
confict of interest or recent involvement with the institu-
tion (or with its faculty of engineering). Tey must not
have been directly involved in the development or delivery
of the program in question or in the accreditation deci-
sion-making process. All members of the Review Com-
mittee shall be licensed professional engineers in Canada.
Te institution and the Accreditation Boards Executive
Committee can object, with demonstrated grounds with
respect to confict of interest, to any member of the Re-
view Committee. Ruling on such objections shall be made
by Engineers Canadas Executive Committee, with such
rulings to be fnal and binding.
Once the Review Committee has been established, the
chief executive ofcer of Engineers Canada sets an accept-
able date and place for the hearing. Te date of the hearing
must be no later than 90 days following receipt of confr-
mation from the institution to proceed with its request for
a formal review.
4. The formal review
A document detailing the institutions case for a formal
review must be received by the chief executive ofcer
of Engineers Canada at least 30 days before the date set
for the hearing so that the Review Committee and the
Accreditation Board may be provided with this informa-
tion before the hearing.
1
Ranking member herein refers to the chair, followed by the vice-chair,
followed by the past-chair, followed by the members in the order of length
of service, and is available to serve on the Committee.
Ce document doit indiquer les raisons pour lesquelles
ltablissement conteste la dcision du Bureau dagrment
de ne pas agrer le programme. Les motifs quil est possible
dinvoquer pour contester la dcision sont :
lexistence dune erreur de fait,
lomission par le Bureau dagrment de se conformer
ses procdures publies,
le recours par le Bureau dagrment des normes ou des
preuves qui sont insufsantes ou inappropries la lumire
des Normes et procdures dagrment publies du Bureau
dagrment,
un confit dintrt.
Le document nonant les motifs de ltablissement doit aussi
tre accompagn de tout autre document ou pice sur lesquels
ltablissement compte se fonder lors de laudience. Ces docu-
ments doivent tre mis la disposition du Bureau dagrment
et du Comit de rvision avant la tenue de laudience.
5. Fonction du Comit de rvision
Le Comit de rvision est charg par le comit
excutif dIngnieurs Canada de revoir les motifs dclars
justifant la rvision ofcielle. Le Comit de rvision est
tout particulirement charg de dterminer si des motifs
valables, tels que dfnis la section 4 ci-dessus, ont t
dmontrs et, le cas chant, si ces motifs pourraient avoir
infu sur la dcision. Le Comit de rvision ne tient pas
compte des amliorations apportes au programme aprs
la dcision dagrment.
6. Documents examins par le
Comit de rvision
Tel que dcrit la section 4, ltablissement doit soumettre
de la documentation nonant les motifs de son opposition
la dcision. Le Bureau dagrment peut soumettre par crit
des textes visant rpondre aux motifs dopposition soulevs
par ltablissement et/ou y rpondre au cours de laudience.
Ces pices crites doivent tre remises au chef de la direction
dIngnieurs Canada au moins 15 jours avant la tenue de
laudience, et ce, afn dtre transmises ltablissement et
au Comit de rvision. Tout document supplmentaire
en rponse aux pices soumises par le Bureau dagrm ent
(le cas chant) peut tre dpos par ltablissement au
Comit de rvision et au Bureau dagrment en tout temps
avant le dbut de laudience.
Tis document must present reasons why the institution is
challenging the decision of the Accreditation Board not to
accredit the program. Te possible grounds for challenging
the decision are:
evidence of errors of fact,
evidence of failure of the Accreditation Board to
conform to its published procedures,
reliance by the Accreditation Board on criteria or
evidence which are insufcient or inappropriate in light
of the Accreditation Boards published accreditation
criteria and procedures,
confict of interest.
With the document detailing the institutions case, the
institution should also fle any other documents or written
material on which the institution intends to rely at the
hearing. Tis material will be provided to the Accreditation
Board and the Review Committee prior to the hearing.
5. Authority of the Review Committee
Te Review Committee is charged by the Executive
Committee of Engineers Canada to review the stated
grounds for the formal review. In particular the Review
Committee is charged with determining whether valid
grounds as defned in Section 4, above, have been
demonstrated and, if so, whether these grounds could
have afected the decision. Te Review Committee does
not consider improvements to the program made
subsequent to the accreditation decision.
6. Materials considered by the
Review Committee
As described in Section 4, the institution must submit
documentation describing the grounds for challenging the
decision. Te Accreditation Board may submit written
materials responding to the issues raised by the institution
and/or respond at the hearing to the issues that were raised
in the documentation. Any written materials from the
Accreditation Board must be submitted to the chief
executive ofcer of Engineers Canada at least 15 days
before the date of the hearing for distribution to the insti-
tution and the Review Committee. Additional documenta-
tion from the institution which responds to the submis-
sion by the Accreditation Board (if such occurs) may be
presented by the institution to the Review Committee and
the Accreditation Board at any time prior to the com-
mencement of the hearing.
111
Ces documents supplmentaires doivent tre fonds sur
linformation qui a t soumise au Bureau dagrment ou ses
reprsentants avant la dcision dagrment qui est conteste.
Les claircissements, observations ou rfutations concernant
lun quelconque de ces documents crits sont efectus verbale-
ment laudience. Lors de celle-ci, ltablissement et le Bureau
dagrment peuvent galement prsenter verbalement des
preuves supplmentaires, condition quelles se limitent aux
conditions et aux circonstances qui avaient cours avant la
dcision dagrment qui est conteste.
7. Reprsentation laudience
Le Bureau dagrment est reprsent par le prsident du
Bureau dagrment (ou une personne dsigne par celui-ci)
et par toute autre personne choisie par le prsident du Bureau
dagrment ou invite assister laudience par le prsident
du Comit de rvision.
Ltablissement est reprsent par les administrateurs
responsables du programme et par toute autre personne invi-
te assister laudience par le prsident du Comit
de rvision.
Ingnieurs Canada peut tre reprsent, titre dobservateur,
par son prsident (ou une personne dsigne par celui-ci) et
par le chef de la direction.
Le Comit de rvision pourra avoir recours un avocat
qui agira titre de conseiller juridique pendant laudience,
ainsi que lors de ses dlibrations. Comme les procdures
ne sont pas de nature judiciaire, ni le Bureau dagrment,
ni ltablissement ne pourront tre accompagns dun
conseiller juridique laudience.
Le public nest pas invit assister laudience devant
le Comit de rvision. Toute personne autre que les
reprsentants mentionns ci-haut ne pourra assister
laudience quavec la permission du prsident du Comit
de rvision, qui aura pralablement consult cet gard
le chef de la direction dIngnieurs Canada.
8. Droulement de la rvision mene par
le Comit
Le prsident du Comit de rvision invite le reprsentant
dsign de ltablissement exposer son cas en faisant renvoi
aux documents soumis. Des dtails supplmentaires peuvent
tre fournis par les autres reprsentants de ltablissement qui
sont prsents. Les reprsentants du Bureau dagrment ont
la possibilit de ragir sans rserves aux documents crits et
All additional documentation must be based on informa-
tion that was presented to the Accreditation Board or its
representatives up to the time of the challenged accredita-
tion decision.
Clarifcations, observations or rebuttals concerning any
of these written materials are made orally in the hearing.
In the hearing, the institution and the Accreditation Board
may present additional evidence orally so long as it is
confned to conditions and circumstances prevailing up
to the time of the challenged accreditation decision.
7. Representation at the hearing
Te Accreditation Board is represented by the chair of
the Accreditation Board (or the chairs designate) and by
any others chosen by the chair of the Accreditation Board
or requested to be present by the chair of the Review
Committee.
Te institution is represented by administrative
ofcers with responsibility for the program and any
others requested to be present by the chair of the Review
Committee.
Engineers Canada may be represented as an observer
by its president (or the presidents designate) and chief
executive ofcer.
Te Review Committee may engage legal counsel to act
as a legal advisor during the hearing as well as during its
deliberations. In that the proceedings are not judicial in
nature, neither the Accreditation Board nor the institution
may bring legal counsel to the hearing.
Te hearing before the Review Committee is not open to
the public. Attendance at the hearing by anyone other than
the representatives listed above may be only with permis-
sion of the chair of the Review Committee in consultation
with the chief executive ofcer of Engineers Canada.
8. Conduct of the review by the Committee
Te chair of the Review Committee calls upon the
designated representative of the institution to state its case,
including reference to submitted documents. Additional
details may be provided by other representatives of the
institution who are present. Representatives of the
Accreditation Board are given the opportunity to respond
la prsentation initiale de ltablissement. Les deux parties
peuvent poser des questions, faire des observations ou claircir
leur position. Les membres du Comit de rvision peuvent,
en tout temps, poser des questions, revoir la documentation
et soulever des questions pertinentes.
Lorsque le prsident du Comit de rvision est convaincu
que toutes les preuves pertinentes ont t prsentes et que
les parties ont eu loccasion sufsante de prsenter leurs
arguments et leur position, chaque partie est invite
prsenter une courte dclaration de clture. Les membres
du Comit de rvision doivent tous assister la prsentation
intgrale de toutes les preuves.
Nul document dpos auprs du Comit de rvision ou nul
renseignement crit ou verbal prsent laudience ne sera
transmis ou rvl une autre partie par le Comit de
rvision, le Bureau dagrment, dIngnieurs Canada ou leurs
reprsentants. Tout renseignement de ce genre peut tre
rvl par ltablissement, condition quil soit rvl dans
son intgralit.
9. Recommandations et dcisions
Le Comit de rvision dcide de sa recommandation lors
dune sance huis clos aprs laudience. La dcision est prise
par une majorit des membres du Comit. Le Comit signife
sa recommandation par crit, accompagne dun rsum de
la preuve et des raisons de la recommandation, au comit
excutif dIngnieurs Canada dans les 30 jours qui suivent
la fn de laudience. Bien quun rapport de consensus soit
souhaitable, les membres ont tous le droit de fournir leurs
opinions en annexe. Ds quil reoit le rapport du Comit,
le chef de la direction dIngnieurs Canada en transmet des
copies ltablissement et au Bureau dagrment. Le Comit
de rvision peut faire lune des recommandations suivantes :

9.1 La dcision du Bureau dagrment de ne pas agrer
le programme en cause devrait tre maintenue.
Les raisons du maintien de la dcision sont :
9.1.1 la dcision du Bureau dagrment na pas t infuence
par une grave erreur de fait contenue dans la documen-
tation ou dans tout autre renseignement, avant que le
Bureau dagrment ne prenne sa dcision; et
fully to the written submission and to the initial presenta-
tion by the institution. Both parties are given an oppor-
tunity to ask questions, provide observations and clarify
positions. Members of the Review Committee may ask
questions, review documentation and raise relevant issues
at any time.
When the chair of the Review Committee is satisfed
that all relevant evidence has been presented and the
parties have had adequate opportunity to present their
arguments and positions, each party is invited to present
a brief closing summary statement. All members of the
Review Committee must be present for the full presenta-
tion of all the evidence.
No document fled with the Review Committee or
information, written or oral, presented at the hearing
will be transmitted or revealed to any other party by the
Review Committee, the Accreditation Board, Engineers
Canada or their representatives. Any such information may
be disclosed by the institution provided that it is disclosed
in its entirety.
9. Recommendations and decisions
Te Review Committee decides on its recommendation in
an in-camera session following the hearing. Te decision is
made by a majority of members of the Review Committee.
Te Review Committee reports its recommendation in
writing, together with a summary of the evidence and
the reasons for the recommendation, to the Executive
Committee of Engineers Canada within 30 days of the
conclusion of the hearing. While a consensus report is
desirable, all members nevertheless have the right to pro-
vide an appendix to the report providing their opinions.
Immediately thereafter, the chief executive ofcer transmits
copies of the Review Committees report to the institution
and to the Accreditation Board. Te Review Committee
may make one of the following recommendations:
9.1 Te decision of the Accreditation Board not to
accredit the program under review should be up-
held. Te reasons for upholding the Accreditation
Board decision are:
9.1.1 the decision of the Accreditation Board was not
afected by any signifcant error of fact contained in
the documentation or other information before the
Accreditation Board in arriving at its decision; and
113
9.1.2 le Bureau dagrment, lorsquil a pris sa dcision,
sest conform ses procdures publies; et
9.1.3 le Bureau dagrment, lorsquil a pris sa dcision,
sest fond sur des normes sufsantes et appropries,
conformment ses normes publies; et
9.1.4 lexistence daucun confit dintrt na t dmontre.
Par consquent, le Comit de rvision recommande
au comit excutif dIngnieurs Canada de ne pas
modifer la dcision prise par le Bureau dagrment
concernant lagrment du programme qui fait lobjet
de la rvision.
9.2 La dcision du Bureau dagrment de ne pas agrer
le programme faisant lobjet de la rvision devrait tre
annule. Les raisons de lannulation de la dcision du
Bureau dagrment sont :
9.2.1 la dcision du Bureau dagrment a t infuence par
une ou plusieurs erreurs de fait importantes contenues
dans la documentation ou dans tout autre renseigne-
ment, avant que le Bureau dagrment ne prenne sa
dcision; et/ou
9.2.2 le Bureau dagrment, lorsquil a pris sa dcision, ne
sest pas conform ses procdures publies; et/ou
9.2.3 Le Bureau dagrment, lorsquil a pris sa dcision, sest
fond sur des normes insufsantes et inappropries,
la lumire de ses normes publies; et/ou
9.2.4 lexistence dun confit dintrt a t dmontre.
Par consquent, le Comit de rvision recommande
au comit excutif dIngnieurs Canada de renvoyer
la question au Bureau dagrment et de lenjoindre
de rexaminer sa dcision de refuser ou de mettre
fn lagrment du programme qui fait lobjet de
la rvision, en tenant compte des constatations faites
par le Comit de rvision.
Le processus de rvision ofcielle prend fn avec
lannonce de la dcision du comit excutif
dIngnieurs Canada.
9.1.2 the Accreditation Board, in reaching its decision,
conformed to its published procedures; and
used sufcient and appropriate criteria consistent
with its published criteria; and
9.1.4 no confict of interest has been demonstrated.
Terefore, the Review Committee would recom-
mend to Engineers Canadas Executive Committee
that there be no change in the action taken by the
Accreditation Board regarding the accreditation of
the program under review.
9.2 Te decision of the Accreditation Board not to
accredit the program under review should be set
aside. Te reasons for setting aside the Accreditation
Board decision are:
9.2.1 the decision of the Accreditation Board was afected
by one or more signifcant errors of fact contained
in the documentation or other information before
the Accreditation Board in arriving at its decision;
and/or
did not conform to its published procedures; and/or
used insufcient or inappropriate criteria in light
of its published criteria; and/or
9.2.4 confict of interest has been demonstrated.
Terefore, the Review Committee would recom-
mend to Engineers Canadas Executive Committee
that the matter be sent back to the Accreditation
Board and that the Accreditation Board be instruct-
ed to reconsider its decision to deny or terminate
accreditation of the program under review, taking
into account the fnding of the Review Committee.
Te formal review procedure terminates with
the issuance of Engineers Canadas Executive
Committees decision.
10. Rexamen par le Bureau dagrment
Lorsque le comit excutif dIngnieurs Canada renvoie
la question au Bureau dagrment, ce dernier rexamine la
dcision dagrment, en tenant compte du rapport du Comit
de rvision et de tout renseignement quil pourrait demander
au Comit ou ltablissement de lui fournir afn dclaircir
la situation. Le rexamen sefectue dans les 60 jours de la
rception de la dcision du chef de la direction. Il a lieu la
runion ordinaire suivante du Bureau dagrment, si cette
runion doit avoir lieu dans les dlais prescrits, sinon une
runion spciale du Bureau dagrment est convoque pour
laudition du cas. Le Bureau dagrment peut alors confrmer
sa dcision de refuser lagrment ou dy mettre fn, ou il peut
agrer le programme.
La dcision dagrment du Bureau dagrment est
communique au prsident et au chef de la direction
dIngnieurs Canada. Le chef de la direction avise le doyen
et le prsident de ltablissement au sujet de la dcision.
Le doyen recevra des explications crites compltes
concernant la dcision. Ltablissement devra informer les
tudiants et le personnel quant la situation du programme
en matire dagrment. Cette dcision prise par le Bureau
dagrment au terme de la rvision ofcielle ne peut faire
lobjet dune autre rvision ofcielle.
11. Visite spciale
Si le Bureau dagrment confrme sa dcision de
refuser lagrment ou dy mettre fn aprs que, lissue
de la rvision ofcielle, il a t conclu que la dcision du
Bureau dagrment de ne pas agrer le programme en cause
devrait tre annule, ltablissement doit avoir la possibilit
de prsenter une demande de visite spciale dans les 14 jours
qui suivent lavis de confrmation de la dcision du Bureau
dagrment de refuser lagrment ou dy mettre fn. Ltablisse-
ment nest pas tenu de fournir de la documentation pour
justifer cette demande de visite, mais il peut en fournir
lappui de sa demande. Le Bureau dagrment doit prvoir
une visite spciale ltablissement dans le cycle dagrment
en cours. Tout sera mis en uvre pour que cette visite ait lieu
avant la prochaine runion de dcision du Bureau dagrment.
La dcision prise lissue de la visite spciale est fnale et ne
peut faire lobjet dune demande de rvision ofcielle.
10. Reconsideration by the
Accreditation Board
When Engineers Canadas Executive Committee sends the
matter back to the Accreditation Board, the Accreditation
Board reconsiders the accreditation decision, taking into
account the Report of the Review Committee and any
clarifying information it may require from that Committee
or the institution. Te reconsideration shall occur within
60 days of receipt of the decision from the chief execu-
tive ofcer. Tis will occur at the next regular meeting of
the Accreditation Board, if such occurs within that time
period, otherwise a special meeting of the Accreditation
Board will be convened to hear the case. Te Accredita-
tion Board may confrm its decision to deny or terminate
accreditation or it may accredit the program.
Following the Accreditation Board accreditation decision,
Engineers Canadas president and chief executive ofcer
are informed of the decision. Te chief executive ofcer
notifes the dean and the president of the institution of
the decision. Te dean is provided with a comprehensive
written explanation for the decision. Te institution is
expected to inform students and staf of the accreditation
status of the program. Such a decision by the Accreditation
Board, following a reconsideration arising out of a formal
review is not subject to further formal review.
11. Special visit
In the event that the Accreditation Board confrms its
decision to deny or terminate accreditation after a formal
review has resulted in a fnding that the decision of the
Accreditation Board not to accredit the program under
review should be set aside, the institution shall have the
option of requesting a special visit within 14 days of being
notifed of the confrmation of the decision to deny or
terminate. Te special visit request will not require
documentation justifying the visit but the institution
may provide documentation supporting its request.
Te Accreditation Board shall include a special visit to
the institution within the current accreditation cycle.
Best eforts will be made to complete the visit prior to
the next Accreditation Board decision meeting.
Te decision resulting from the special visit is fnal
and cannot be the subject of a request for formal review.
115
12. Cots
Si le Comit de rvision recommande le maintien de la
dcision du Bureau dagrment de refuser lagrment ou
dy mettre fn, les dpenses du Comit sont la charge de
ltablissement; autrement, elles sont la charge dIngnieurs
Canada. Ltablissement et le Bureau dagrment assument
chacun leurs propres dpenses de reprsentation laudience.
juin 2006
Mise jour : novembre 2009
12. Costs
Should the Review Committee recommend that the
Accreditation Boards decision to deny or terminate
accreditation be upheld, the Review Committee expenses
are borne by the institution; otherwise, they are borne by
Engineers Canada. Te institution and the Accreditation
Board are each responsible for their own expenses in being
represented at the hearing.
June 2006
Updated: November 2009
Notes
Engineers Canada
1100-180 Elgin Street
Ottawa, Ontario K2P 2K3
Telephone: 613.232.2474
Fax: 613.230.5759
www.engineerscanada.ca
Ingnieurs Canada
1100-180, rue Elgin
Ottawa (Ontario) K2P 2K3
Tlphone : 613.232.2474
Tlcopieur : 613.230.5759
www.ingenieurscanada.ca

Accreditation Criteria Procedures 2013

Cargado por

Información del documento

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Accreditation Criteria Procedures 2013

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

The road to a P.ENG.

También podría gustarte