You are on page 1of 16

See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281585940

Analysis of Program Outcomes Attainment for


Engineering Graduates for NBA Accreditation
Article August 2015

CITATIONS

READS

978

1 author:
Therese Yamuna Mahesh
Amal Jyothi College of Engineering
10 PUBLICATIONS 1 CITATION
SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Therese Yamuna Mahesh on 08 September 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.

Journal of Information Technology and Sciences


Volume 1 Issue 2

Analysis of Program Outcomes Attainment for Engineering Graduates for


NBA Accreditation
1

Therese Yamuna Mahesh, 2Yalena Thomas, 3K.L. Shunmuganathan

Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Bharath University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

Department of Basic Science and Humanities, Amal Jyothi College of Engineering, Kanjirapally, Kerala, India

Department of Computer Science and Engineering, R.M.K. College of Engineering, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
E-mail: Yamuna.mahesh@gmail.com, yalenathomas@amaljyothi.ac.in, hodcse@rmk.ac.in

Abstract
One of the requirements of the National Board of Accreditation (NBA) for accrediting a program in an
academic institution in India is the analysis of the attainment of program outcomes by the students. This
paper gives a method for analysing the extent to which the students attain the program outcomes on
completing the program. The method illustrated analyses the attainment level for a single student as well
as a batch. The initial calculations are done using excel and the same database is used to train a neural
network to get the required output. Data set of individual students or batch of students can be given to the
trained network to get the attainment level of program outcomes. The analysis can be done by using the
marks secured by the students or by defining rubrics for the respective courses.
Keywords: Evaluation methodologies, public spaces and computing, country-specific developments,
teaching/learning strategies, applications in subject areas
method of evaluation using the marks scored by

INTRODUCTION
The basic terms to be understood in the

the students or by using rubrics is explained in

analysis of program outcomes attainment by the

detail in this paper. Further, testing of the same

students undergoing the various courses include

using neural networks is also done. The

program

parameters to be classified include the student

educational

objectives,

graduate

attributes, program outcomes, course outcomes,

attainment

of

Course

rubrics, criteria etc. An initial database of the

Outcomes and Program Educational Objectives

students marks is tabulated using the various

etc. [1]

measuring tools like tests, quiz, seminars etc. The

Page 1-14 MAT Journals 2015. All Rights Reserved

Outcomes,

Program

Journal of Information Technology and Sciences


Volume 1 Issue 2

Program Educational Objectives (PEO)

To have a basic knowledge of all branches

The Program Educational Objectives reflect the

of Engineering related to Electronics and

qualities that the student acquired in about 5 years

Communication (PO1).

after completing the course.

To analyze and solve problems in courses

Program Outcomes (PO)

related to Electronics and Communication

Program Outcomes define the qualities attained by

Engineering (PO2).

the students on completing the program. The

To conduct experiments and investigate

program outcomes for a particular course can be

complex

formed from the eleven graduates attribute defined

Communication Engineering (PO3).

(GA) by NBA as shown below [2].

problems

in

Electronics

and

To utilize modern tools in the design of

Engineering Knowledge (GA1).

experiments and arrive at suitable solutions

Problem Analysis (GA2).

(PO4).

Conduct Investigation of Complex Problems

To fully realize the role of an Electronics

(GA3).

and Communication Engineer for the benefit

Modern Tool Usage (GA4).

of the Society (PO5).

The Engineer and Society (GA5).

Environment and Sustainability (GA6).

concerned of its Sustainability as an

Ethics (GA7).

Electronics and Communication Engineer

Individual and Team Work (GA8).

(PO6).

Communication (GA9).

Project Management and Finance (GA10).

Lifelong Learning (GA11).

To work as an Individual and also to


promote Team work (PO8).

Program Outcomes are framed from the graduate

To communicate properly using oral and


written means (PO9).

of the respective departments. The program


outcomes for a particular course in Engineering, say

To practice Engineering with good ethical


values (PO7).

attributes defined by NBA to suit the requirements

To preserve the environment and be

To Manage Projects and Financial matters


(PO10).

Electronics and Communication Engineering can be


defined based on the graduate attributes of NBA as

To engage in Lifelong Learning (PO11).

follows:

To apply the knowledge of mathematics,

Page 1-14 MAT Journals 2015. All Rights Reserved

Journal of Information Technology and Sciences


Volume 1 Issue 2

science and engineering to solve real time

problems (PO12).

Course Outcomes (CO)


Course Outcomes define the qualities attained

Rubrics are written to suit the requirements of

by the students on completing the particular

the respective courses and departments. The

course on a subject. The extend of attainment

method of framing rubrics for the eighth PO

of course outcomes are measured by the

of the course outcome based on NBA

marks scored by the student or by using

graduate attributes is as shown below. The

rubrics to measure the performance of the

four logical levels of attainment (needs

student.

improvement, can do better, satisfactory,


exceeds

Rubrics and Criteria (CR)

expectation)

are

defined.

An

Rubrics can be used as the measurement tools

example of rubric written for measuring (PO-

for the attainment of the program outcomes

8) is shown in Table 1.

of

certain

courses

like

project

work,

workshops, mini projects, seminars etc.

Page 1-14 MAT Journals 2015. All Rights Reserved

Journal of Information Technology and Sciences


Volume 1 Issue 2

Table 1: Rubrics for (PO-8) to work as an Individual and also to Promote Team Work.
Measurements
Criteria(CR)
Research
and
Information

Gather

Needs
Improvement
Does not collect
any relevant
information; no
useful
suggestions to
address team's
needs

Taking Responsibility

Does not perform


assigned tasks;
often misses
meetings and,
when present,
does not have
anything
constructive to
say; relies on
others to do the
work

Valuing
Members

Often argues with


team mates;
doesn't let anyone
else talk;
occasional
personal attacks
and "put-downs";
wants to have
things done his
way and does not
listen to alternate
approaches

Other

Team

Can do Better

Satisfactory

Collects
information
when prodded;
tries to offer
some ideas, but
not well
developed, and
not clearly
expressed, to
meet team's
needs

Collects basic,
useful
information
related to the
project;
occasionally
offers useful
ideas to meet
the team's needs

Performs
assigned tasks
but needs many
reminders;
attends meetings
regularly but
generally does
not say anything
constructive;
sometimes
expects others to
do his/her work
Usually does
much of the
talking; does not
pay much
attention when
others talk, and
often assumes
their ideas will
not work; no
personal attacks
and put-downs
but sometimes
patronizing;
when others get
through to him,
works
reasonably well
with them

Performs all
assigned tasks;
attends
meetings
regularly and
usually
participates
effectively;
generally
reliable

Generally
listens to others'
points of view;
always uses
appropriate and
respectful
language; tries
to make a
definite effort to
understand
others' ideas;

Page 1-14 MAT Journals 2015. All Rights Reserved

Exceeds
Expectation
Collects and
presents to the
team a great
deal of relevant
information;
offers welldeveloped and
clearly
expressed ideas
directly related
to the group's
purpose
Performs all
tasks very
effectively;
attends all
meetings and
participates
enthusiastically;
very reliable

Always listens
to others and
their ideas;
helps them
develop their
ideas while
giving them full
credit; always
helps the team
reach a fair
decision.

Journal of Information Technology and Sciences


Volume 1 Issue 2

GROUPING THE COURSES IN THE PROGRAM


All the courses under the program are grouped

CO[1] Get the response of the discrete time LTI

under the twelve defined program outcomes. The

systems.

course outcomes of a course should satisfy any

CO[2] Get the response of linear phase systems

one or more of the defined program outcomes.

and all pass systems.

The course outcome and mapping of the course

CO[3] Design Digital filter and realize the

outcome to the program outcome of a course is as

structures.

shown below.

CO[4] Understand

The course outcome for the subject digital signal


processing

DFT

and

convolution

concepts.

for the sixth semester B-Tech

Table 2 shows how the course outcomes

Electronics and Communication Engineering

mentioned above satisfy the program outcomes

branch of Mahatma Gandhi University is given

defined.

below.

indicates medium correlation with the respective

After completing this course, the student should

PO. The value obtained for CO attainment is

demonstrate the knowledge and ability to:

multiplied by 1 for strong and .7 for medium

S indicates strong correlation and M

correlation
.

with

Table 2: Mapping of Course Outcome and Program Outcome.

Program Outcome
Course

9 10 11

Outcome

CO (4)

CO (5)

CO (1)

CO (2)

CO (3)

Page 1-14 MAT Journals 2015. All Rights Reserved

the

PO.

Journal of Information Technology and Sciences


Volume 1 Issue 2

It can be seen that the CO of the above course contributes to PO2, PO10 and PO11.
under PO1.
Calculation of PO
An example of PO attainment calculation is

RUBRICS BASED EVALUATION


Certain courses are better evaluated using

as shown below:

rubrics like lab work, projects, case studies etc.


[3].

Number of criteria (CR) for defining the


rubrics=3 (i.e., CR1, CR2, CR3).

Criteria (CR) are defined in rubrics to


measure COs of each subject. Two or

(i.e., CO1, CO2, CO3).

more COs (CO1, CO2, CO3) can be used

Number of course outcomes defined=3

Total course outcome due to the given

to define course objective of each course.

course= Normalised values of course

All the subjects in the program are

outcome i.e., (CO1+CO2+CO3)/ (27).

grouped under the defined POs. i.e., if

Based on the mapping of the course

there are 5 courses listed under PO1, the

outcomes of a given course with the POs

program outcomes due to the five courses

defined for the program (refer Table 2)

can be listed as PO1.1, PO1.2, PO1.3,

the values of attainment of all CO(k)

PO1.4 and PO1.5. These values are equal

contribute to the attainment of the PO due

to the normalized COs of the courses i.e.,

to a single course.

PO1.1 corresponds to normalized CO(k)

The basic weights assigned for the four

(k varies from 1 to n where n is the total

attainment levels are shown below in Table 3.

number of COs of course 1 grouped


Table 3: Basic Weights Assigned.
Measurement Needs
Can do
Satisfacto
Impro
Better
ry
vement
45% to
60% to
>45%
60%
75%
Weight age
for CR
Classification

Exceeds
Expectat
ion
<75%

Page 1-14 MAT Journals 2015. All Rights Reserved

Journal of Information Technology and Sciences


Volume 1 Issue 2

Calculation of CO
CR1, CR2 and CR3 are the three criteria defined

as the summation of the three criterias shown in

in the rubrics for course outcome 1 (CO1). The

the rubrics.

below Table 4 shows the course outcome (CO1)


Table 4: Calculation of Course Objective 1 CO [1].
Student
CR1 CR2 CR3 CO1
Name
a

The Table showing the tabulation for calculation

course has got three objectives CO1, CO2, CO3.

of CO attainment is shown below (Table 5). The

The total course objective is the summation of the

criterias defined in the rubrics are given the basic

average of the normalised values of each CO(k)

weights according to the performance of the

where k takes values from 1 to 3.

students. In the example shown in Table 4 the

Page 1-14 MAT Journals 2015. All Rights Reserved

Journal of Information Technology and Sciences


Volume 1 Issue 2

Table 5: Calculation of CO(k) and the Total CO Attainment Value for a Course Based on Rubrics
Assessment.
Name

C C
R R
1 2

C
R
3

CO
1

1
2
2
1
3
3
1
2
0
0

1
2
2
1
3
3
1
2
0
0

3
6
6
3
9
9
3
6
0
0

a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j

1
2
2
1
3
3
1
2
0
0

CO1
nor
mali
zed
0.33
0.67
0.67
0.33
1.00
1.00
0.33
0.67
0.00
0.00

C C C
R R R
1 2 3
2
3
2
2
3
1
2
3
3
1

2
3
2
2
3
1
2
3
3
1

2
3
2
2
3
1
2
3
3
1

CO
2

6
9
6
6
9
3
6
9
9
3

Average values for Batch of 10 students

CO2
nor
mali
zed
0.67
1.00
0.67
0.67
1.00
0.33
0.67
1.00
1.00
0.33

C
R
1

C
R
2

C
R
3

CO
3

2
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
2

2
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
2

2
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
2

6
9
9
6
9
9
6
9
9
6

CO3
nor
mali
zed
0.67
1.00
1.00
0.67
1.00
1.00
0.67
1.00
1.00
0.67

CO

15
24
21
15
27
21
15
24
18
9

CO
nor
mali
zed
0.56
0.89
0.78
0.56
1.00
0.78
0.56
0.89
0.67
0.33

column gives the CO attainment value of a batch for


the given course. Likewise the individual CO(k)

CO1=0.5

(where k takes values from 1 to n, n is the total

CO2=0.73

number of course outcomes for a given course) for

CO3=0.87

each student and CO[k] for a given batch can be

CO=0.7

calculated. The CO[k] values can be mapped to the


corresponding POs. The range of marks for each

The value of CO attainment for each student is

level of attainment can be decided by the

shown in the last column. The average of the last

departments.

Page 1-14 MAT Journals 2015. All Rights Reserved

Journal of Information Technology and Sciences


Volume 1 Issue 2

The graphical representation of the above attainment level can also be represented as shown in Figure 1
below:

Fig. 1: CO Attainment for a Course-Graphical Representation.


MARK BASED EVALUATION

mark based evaluation is also on the same scale as

In the case of mark based evaluation the weights

rubric based evaluation. Table 6 shows the

are assigned based on the marks scored in a scale

tabulation for the calculation of CO for a course

of hundred marks. The basic weights assigned to

based on a set of three evaluation marks. The

each student is multiplied by 3 (as a replacement

measurement tools for the evaluation marks can

for CR1,CR2,CR3 as used in rubrics) so that the

be tests, quizzes etc.

Page 1-14 MAT Journals 2015. All Rights Reserved

Journal of Information Technology and Sciences


Volume 1 Issue 2

Table 6: Calculation of CO(k) and the Total CO Attainment Value for a Course based on Marks Secured.

EVALUATION BASED ON NEURAL NETWORKS

The calculation of CO and PO can be easily implemented using neural networks [2]. Normalisation is not
required in the case of neural Network based evaluation. The weights are assigned for CO and PO
calculation according to the table shown below. Prior knowledge of the PO under which the CO is grouped
is essential for proper classification. The below example shows all the COs (CO1, CO2, CO3) being
grouped under a single PO. The classification is done using multilayer perceptron. The weights assigned for
classification are shown in the Table 7 below.
Table 7: Calculation of CO(k) and the Total CO Attainment Value for a Course based on Marks Secured.
Measureme
nt
Basic Score
Score for
CO(k)=Basic
score *3
Score for PO
under which
the CO is
grouped

10

Needs
Improv
ement
0

Can Do
Better

Satisfactor
y

Exceeds
Expectation

12

16

20

Page 1-14 MAT Journals 2015. All Rights Reserved

Journal of Information Technology and Sciences


Volume 1 Issue 2

Results of the classification using neural networks (multilayer perceptron) are shown in Figure 2 and Figure
3 shown below:

Fig. 2: Classifier type and attributes used for classification.

11

Page 1-14 MAT Journals 2015. All Rights Reserved

Journal of Information Technology and Sciences


Volume 1 Issue 2

Fig.3: Summary of Evaluation on Training Data Set.

The below graph Figure 3 shows the level of


attainment of each CO for a single course and

12

also the number of students who have attained the


PO under which the course is grouped.

Page 1-14 MAT Journals 2015. All Rights Reserved

Journal of Information Technology and Sciences


Volume 1 Issue 2

Fig. 3: Graphical Classification for CO1, CO2, CO3, CO Values and PO.
Test Data
The trained neural network is used for testing. The

classified. Given below (Fig. 4) is the summary of a

extent to which the number of students have

test data set consisting of data of three students.

attained the CO and PO values are correctly


.

13

Page 1-14 MAT Journals 2015. All Rights Reserved

Journal of Information Technology and Sciences


Volume 1 Issue 2

Fig. 4: Summary of Evaluation on Test Data Set.

CONCLUSION

level of a batch of students can be observed.

The above method can be used for evaluating

As the normalization is done on a scale of one,

the level of attainment of program outcomes

it is easy to view the attainment level in

using a simple tabulation. The attainment level

percentage. Also conversion to any scale other

is broadly classified into four classes. The

than one can also be done easily. Once we train

graphical representation of the attainment level

a neural network it becomes easy to get the

is also shown. Moreover, the attainment level

classification of any individual student or a

of each student can be studied. On taking the

batch of students to the respective attainment

average of the COs and POs the attainment

levels.

14

Page 1-14 MAT Journals 2015. All Rights Reserved

Journal of Information Technology and Sciences


Volume 1 Issue 2

Innovations in Engineering and

REFERENCES

Technology, IJIET. 2015; 5(2).


1.

2.

Accreditation Manual for Ug Engineering

3.

Therese Yamuna Mahesh. Measurement of

Programmes (Tier-Ii)-NBA; 2013.

program outcomes attainment by using

Therese Yamuna Mahesh, K.L.

Excels. International Journal of

Shunmuganathan, Measurement of

Engineering and Management Research.

program outcomes attainment by using

2015; 5(2).

Neural Networks, International Journal of

15

View publication stats

Page 1-14 MAT Journals 2015. All Rights Reserved

You might also like