Academic Bodies

Evaluation Committee (Visiting Team)

The Evaluation Committees (CEs - Visiting Teams) are responsible for performing the evaluation processes for accreditation purposes. The CEs are made up of an evaluator, preferably a member of the Specialty Technical Commission, with coordination functions, with extensive academic, professional, and evaluation experience. Plus, two or more evaluators depending on the program's size, meeting the defined profile and that are incorporated into CACEI's Evaluators Register.

CACEI evaluators have one or more degrees in a engineering discipline, have a long experience in teaching, research, technological development, or the industry, and are members of CACEI's Evaluators Register. Likewise, evaluators receive training by CACEI on the methods, procedures, and standards that must be met while conducting the evaluations of engineering programs. When visiting the HEIs to which they are assigned, the evaluators meticulously comply with the procedures and protocols established by CACEI and COPAES, and they also adhere to the code of ethics and the standards set by CACEI.

In sum, CACEI's evaluators are key actors in the accreditation process and contribute in a fundamental way to the development, progress, and improvement of HEIs and Mexico's engineering programs.

In the context of the COVID-19 contingency from March 2020, CACEI launched the hybrid mode assessment online for the evaluation visits of the educational programs, considering the recommendations and best international practices. The process includes an ad hoc schedule that depends on the HEI's characteristics, without omitting any activity and taking care of the technical rigor of the Reference Framework. The visit could include the figure of the Observer, if the Visiting Team considers it necessary, to be responsible for checking facilities, laboratories, and workshops that support the educational program.

The evaluation visit in situ or hybrid mode can be:

  • Visits of a single program. These visits are carried out by three evaluators, where one of them is appointed by the Discipline Technical Commission as the visit coordinator.
  • Multi-program visits. This are simultaneous visits of two to five programs. It is performed by a group of evaluators and each team is integrated by two evaluators for each program. The Discipline Technical Commission (CTE) appoints one of them as coordinator, and among the corresponding CTEs is designated the General Coordinator of the visit, which oversees all programs.

Discipline Technical Commissions

There is a Technical Committee for each of the specific areas of engineering designed by the Board of Directors. The Technical Committees of Speciality will be integrated by academics, specialists, representatives of public and private universities, as well as professionals of the various branches of engineering.

The Discipline Technical Commissions have the following functions:

  1. Propose to the Executive Council, through the General Director, those persons who, having met the requirements established by CACEI, meet the profile to be evaluators and join its Register.
  2. Propose to the General Director the evaluators that will make up the Evaluation Committees (Visiting Teams) for the different educational programs.
  3. Prepare proposals addressed to the Executive Council about changes or improvements in the criteria, parameters and standards established in the Reference Framework for accreditation and, in general, suggestions for the improvement of processes considering the current regulations of COPAES.
  4. Recommend to the Accreditation Committee the level of decision of the accreditation of the educational program.

Each Discipline Technical Commission (CTE) has a Technical Secretary appointed by the Executive Council, whose function is to coordinate it. The CTEs are composed of academics from different higher education institutions, members of the productive sector, and professional associations. In its integration, the representativeness of the enrollment of the various engineering programs whose programs are the scope of action of the Commission is taken care of. By policies established by CACEI, all CTEs in their integration are represented by the public, federal or state universities, the technological system, and private institutions.

Currently, the Technical Commisions of Specialty of CACEI are as follows:

  • Bioengineering Technical Commission.
  • Earth Science Technical Commission.
  • Civil Engineering Technical Commission.
  • Computer Engineering Technical Commission.
  • Electrical and Electronic Engineering Technical Commission.
  • Business Management Technical Commission.
  • Industrial Engineering Technical Commission.
  • Mechanical Engineering Technical Commission.
  • Chemical Engineering Technical Commission.
  • TSU Technical Commission.

Accreditation Committee

The Accreditation Committee, according to the Bylaws, has the function of reviewing the accreditation process of the programs, the self-evaluation reports, the reports of the Evaluation Committees (Visiting Teams), and that of the corresponding Discipline Technical Commission. This Committee is solely responsible for issuing the final decision on whether or not a program's accreditation is granted. It is made up of the Technical Secretaries of the Discipline Technical Commissions and the General Director.

Appeals Committee

If a program that was not accredited wishes to request a reconsideration of its decision, it may request a review of its case by the Appeals Committee, an independent body from the Accreditation Committee. For this purpose, the program must send CACEI a report with the arguments and evidence by which it considers that the program complies with the established standards within 21 calendar days after receiving its opinion..

The program's report goes through a review of the Appeals Committee. In a period between 30 and 40 days after delivery, the HEI is summoned to defend its reconsideration. The decision issued by the Appeal Committee after the analysis meeting between the institution and the committee is final.

Programs with accreditation for three years may extend for two more years if they request it during the first 18 months after the PE accreditation.

For these purposes, the educational program must send CACEI a request for an extension of the accreditation in no less than one year and no longer than 18 months from the accreditation. It must be accompanied by a document that demonstrates arguments and evidence of compliance with only the indicators previously rated at the level of “is partially achieved.” No other indicators should be included.

The review of said documentation will be in charge of the Appeal Committee, which will review the evidence and arguments. In response to said request, the Committee will determine whether to ratify the three-year term or grant the extension for two more years. The extension request may only be submitted once, and the evaluation of these cases may be subject to an evaluation visit to the institution to validate the improvement in the applicant program.

The Appeals Committee has the following functions:

  1. Respond to appeal requests from HEIs that request a review of the decisions issued by the Accreditation Committee.
  2. Analyze the information received about the program.
  3. Issue a decision on the appeals heard.
  4. Respond to requests from the HEIs, to extend the validity of the accreditation of programs of three to five years.
  5. Issue a decision on the requests heard.

Mid-Term Academic Committee

A program that has been accredited should address the follow-up process, that is:

Two and a half years after obtaining the accreditation, the educational program shall report, using the Mid-Term Report, its progress and the goals achieved by addressing the previously proposed Improvement Plan to CACEI to address the recommendations issued in the accreditation decision.

The Mid-Term Committee has the following functions:

  1. Review and analyze the improvement plans sent by HEIs related to their accredited programs.
  2. Analyze and issue a decision on the Improvement Plans.
  3. Review and analyze the Mid-term reports of the programs sent by HEIs.
  4. Issue a decision on the Mid-term reports.

The review, analysis, and assessment of mid-term reports is the exclusive responsibility of the Mid-Term Commission, which will be responsible for issuing the decision assessing compliance and attention to the recommendations made by CACEI in the accreditation decision.

The Mid-Term Committee is currently composed of three professionals who have extensive academic and practice background and experience in evaluation for accreditation.