OBE Model in engineering education under Washington Accord

1. IN THE NAME OF ALLAH, MOST GRACIOUS,
MOST MERCIFUL

2. 2

3. OUTCOME BASED
EDUCATION
SESSION 1
Dr Jameel Ahmed
Professor & Dean, Faculty
of Engineering & Applied
Sciences, International
University, Islamabad.

4. CONTENTS
4
Outcome Based Education
International Engineering Alliance & Washington Accord
• Implementation of OBE
Pakistan Engineering Council
• PEC Accreditation Process & Qualifying Requirements
Criteria of OBE Based Accreditation
• PEOs
• PLOs
• CLOs
Bloom’s Taxonomy
Continuous Quality Improvement
• For PEOs
• For PLOs
Design Process Flow of PEOs, PLOs and CLOs.

5. OUTCOME BASED
EDUCATION (OBE)
OBE is an approach of curriculum design and teaching
that focuses on what students should be able to
do/attain at the end of the course/ programme.
By the end of the educational experience, each student
should have achieved the goals i.e. Graduate Attributes
or Program Learning Outcomes.
This means starting with a clear picture of what is
important for students to be able to do, then organizing
curriculum, teaching methods and assessments to make
sure that the students achieve the Specified Outcomes.
5

6. OUTCOME BASED
EDUCATION (OBE)
The key parameters to have an outcome-based system
are:
1. Developing a clear set of Learning Outcomes around
which
all of the system's components can be focused.
2. Establishing the conditions and opportunities within
the system that enable and encourage all students to
achieve those essential Outcomes.
6

7. WHAT EXACTLY ARE
OUTCOMES?
Outcomes are clear learning results that we want
students to demonstrate at the end of significant
learning experiences.
Outcomes are not values, beliefs, attitudes, or
psychological states of mind. Instead, these are what
learners can actually do with what they know and have
learned, these are the tangible application of what has
been learned.
This means that outcomes are Actions and Performances
that embody and reflect Learner Competence in using
content, information, ideas, and tools successfully. 7

8. KEY ELEMENTS OF A SOUND
OUTCOME BASED APPROACH
Define Outcomes:
Design Curriculum:
Deliver Instructions:
Document Results:
Determine Advancement:
What students should
achieve?
How to make students
achieve the outcomes?
How to make students
achieve the outcomes?
How to measure what
students have achieved?
Why couldn’t students
achieve the outcome?
8

9. INTERNATIONAL
ENGINEERING ALLIANCE
Alliance among different countries to standardize and
advance benchmarking in engineering profession.
Under IEA, countries sign International Agreements
governing mutual recognition of engineering
qualifications and professional competence.
In each of these agreements, countries/economies who
wish to participate may apply for membership, and if
accepted become members or signatories to the
agreement.
9

10. INTERNATIONAL
ENGINEERING ALLIANCE
Agreements Covering Tertiary Qualifications in Engineering:
There are three agreements covering mutual recognition in
respect of Tertiary-Level Qualifications (diplomas,
bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees) in engineering:
The Washington Accord signed in 1989 was the first one -
it recognizes substantial equivalence in the accreditation of
qualifications in professional engineering, normally of four
years duration.
The Sydney Accord commenced in 2001 and recognizes
substantial equivalence in the accreditation of qualifications
in engineering technology, normally of three years duration.
The Dublin Accord initiated in 2002 for substantial
equivalence in the accreditation of qualifications in
technician engineering, normally of two years duration.
10

11. THE WASHINGTON ACCORD
The Washington Accord, signed in 1989, is an
international agreement among bodies responsible for
accrediting engineering degree programs.
It recognizes the substantial equivalency of programs
accredited by those bodies.
It recommends that graduates of programs accredited by
any of the signatory bodies (countries) be recognized by
the other bodies (countries) as having met the academic
requirements for entry to the practice of engineering.
11

12. THE WASHINGTON ACCORD
(MUTUAL RECOGNITION)
Agreement states:
 Accreditation criteria, policies and procedures of the
signatories have been verified comparable.
 Accreditation decisions made by one signatory are
acceptable to the other signatories.
 Recognition applies only to accreditations conducted
within the signatory’s national or territorial boundaries.
12

13. THE WASHINGTON ACCORD
(BENCHMARKING)
Agreement states:
 The Signatories will identify and encourage the
implementation of
best practice for the academic preparation of engineers
 by mutual monitoring
 regular communication and sharing of information:
 accreditation criteria, systems, procedures, manuals,
publications
 lists of accredited programs;
 invitations to observe accreditation visits; and
invitations to observe meetings of any boards
 Regular monitoring through six-yearly visits now
required
13

14. THE WASHINGTON ACCORD
(BECOMING A SIGNATORY)
 Normal minimum period as provisional is two years
 A provisional that is ready to apply for signatory status
requests a verification visit
 Application must be supported by two signatories
 Visit takes place
 Visit must demonstrate substantial equivalence of:
 Accreditation standard to the Graduate Attributes
 Policies and processes to be substantially equivalent
 Visit report is considered at a general meeting
 Admission of a new signatory requires unanimous
approval
14

15. THE WASHINGTON ACCORD
SIGNATORIES
1. Australia - (Engineers Australia, 1989)
2. Canada - (Engineers Canada, 1989)
3. People's Republic of China - (China Association for
Science and Technology, 2016)
4. Chinese Taipei - (Institute of Engineering Education
Taiwan, 2007)
5. Hong Kong, China - (The Hong Kong Institution of
Engineers, 1995)
6. India - (National Board of Accreditation, 2014)[3]
7. Ireland - (Engineers Ireland, 1989)
8. Japan - (Japan Accreditation Board for Engineering
Education, 2005)
9. Korea - (Accreditation Board for Engineering Education
of Korea, 2007)
15

16. THE WASHINGTON ACCORD
SIGNATORIES
10. Malaysia - (Board of Engineers Malaysia, 2009)
11. New Zealand - (Institution of Professional Engineers New
Zealand, 1989)
12. Russia - (Association for Engineering Education of
Russia, 2012)
13. Singapore - (Institution of Engineers Singapore, 2006)
14. South Africa - (Engineering Council of South Africa,
1999)
15. Sri Lanka - (Institution of Engineers, Sri Lanka, 2014)
16. Turkey - (MÜDEK, 2011)
17. United Kingdom - (Engineering Council UK, 1989)
18. United States - (ABET, 1989)
16

17. THE WASHINGTON ACCORD
PROVISIONAL SIGNATORIES
(MAY BECOME MEMBERS IN FUTURE)
1. Pakistan - (Pakistan Engineering Council)
2. Bangladesh - (Board of Accreditation for Engineering
and Technical Education)
3. Costa Rica - (Association of Engineers and Architects
of Costa Rica)
4. Mexico - (Consejo de Acreditación de la Enseñanza de
la Ingeniería)
5. Peru - (ICACIT)
6. Philippines - (Philippine Technological Council)
17

18. IMPLEMENTATION OF OBE
Guide PEC OBE Manual
2014.
Program
Educational
Objectives (PEOs)
Formulation of
PEOs in line with
University’s Vision
and Mission
Formulation of
Assessment
Methods
Program
Learning
Outcomes (PLOs)
Provided by PEC
(Additional PLOs
may be formulated
in line with PEOs)
Formulation of
Assessment
Methods
Course Learning
Outcomes (CLOs)
Formulation to
target specific
PLOs.
Formulation of
Assessment
Methods
Continuous
Quality
Improvement
(CQI)
Formulation of CQI
procedure.
18

19. PAKISTAN ENGINEERING
COUNCIL
PEC is a statutory body to regulate the engineering
profession including quality of engineering education.
Engineering Accreditation Board (EAB)/EA&QEC is the
autonomous entity, working under PEC umbrella, entrusted
with the task to perform functions related to accreditation
of engineering programs under the relevant provisions of
PEC Act 1976 and Bye-laws.
To assure that the institutions running the program(s) have
demonstrated capabilities to ensure effectiveness of the
educational program, Continual Quality Improvement (CQI)
and following the spirit of Outcome-Based Education (OBE)
over the period of accreditation cycle.
A major policy adopted by the PEC EAB is to accord
accreditation, not at the institution level, but at the program
level for a four-year under-graduate engineering program. 19

20. PAKISTAN ENGINEERING
COUNCIL
SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES:
I. To ensure that the graduates of PEC accredited
programs possess sufficient academic background
and knowledge for pursuing their
professional career in engineering.
II. to assure potential stakeholders and public at large in
identifying those specific programs which meet the
PEC standards for compliance to accreditation
criteria.
III. To encourage improvement of standards of
professional engineering education in the country
through implementation of CQI.
IV. To provide guidelines for the up-gradation of
existing programs and for the development of new
programs. 20

21. PAKISTAN ENGINEERING
COUNCIL
Engineering Accreditation Board (EAB) of PEC:
The Governing Body of PEC constitutes EAB for a three year
term (also known as EA&QEC).
The major functions of EAB are:
i. To implement PEC accreditation policy.
ii. To formulate guidelines and procedures for
accreditation and the launch of new program.
iii. To evaluate the programs at regular intervals not
exceeding five years, with the third-year being the
preparatory period for the next accreditation.
iv. To appoint an Evaluation Team to accredit each
engineering program.
21

22. PAKISTAN ENGINEERING
COUNCIL
v. To receive and review evaluation reports by the
Evaluation Teams, and to communicate its findings to
the institutions concerned for their rejoinder.
vi. To decide on whether accreditation should be granted,
as well as the conditions to be imposed, if there is such
a need.
vii. To publish a directory of all accredited programs (First
Schedule) periodically.
viii. To respond to PEC on complaints and appeals regarding
the accreditation process / decisions.
ix. To represent PEC in mutual recognition agreements on
academic
qualifications with other countries and international
forums.
x. To report its work periodically to PEC Governing Body. 22

23. PEC ACCREDITATION
PROCESS
23

24. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR
ACCREDITATION
Legal Status
1. Chartered University
2. Degree Awarding Institute
3. Constituent Campus
4. Affiliated Institution
Infrastructure & Organizational Setup
1. Sufficient Infrastructure
2. Organizational Setup
Finances
1. Sound Financial Health
2. Recurring & Development Budget
24

25. QUALIFYING REQUIREMENTS
FOR ACCREDITATION
There are 7 components of the qualifying requirements
and each Program is expected to have all the
components.
These components are:
i. Applicant institution must satisfy the legal
status/requirement of the relevant bodies, specifying
the particular legal arrangements as a Charter /
Degree Awarding Institution (DAI), Constituent or
Affiliated institution, or any other type, etc.
ii. A minimum of 128 credit hours of which minimum of
65% credit hours must be from core engineering
courses offered over a period of four years (8
semesters).
iii. Final year project (minimum 6 credit hours).
25

26. QUALIFYING REQUIREMENTS
FOR ACCREDITATION
iv. Full-time engineering faculty (minimum of 8), and
matching student-faculty ratio of 20:1.
v. Progress on / Compliance Report on the last PEC visit
observations / EAB decision.
vi. Summary of initiatives to adopt Outcome Based
Education (Program Learning Objectives and
Outcomes).
vii. Duly completed and signed SAR as per prescribed
format.
26

27. CRITERIA FOR
ACCREDITATION
After fulfilling the qualifying requirements, program
should also conform following list of criteria:
Criterion 1 - Program Educational Objectives (PEOs)
Criterion 2 - Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs)
Criterion 3 - Curriculum and Learning Process
Criterion 4 - Students
Criterion 5 - Faculty and Support Staff
Criterion 6 - Facilities and Infrastructure
Criterion 7 - Institutional Support and Financial
Resources
Criterion 8 - Continuous Quality Improvement
Criterion 9 - Industry Linkages
27

28. CRITERION 1 - PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL
OBJECTIVES (PEOS)
Program educational objectives (PEOs) are broad
statements that describe what graduates are expected to
achieve a few years after graduation.
PEOs must be defined in accordance with
 University Vision
 University Mission
 Program Mission
 Stakeholders Demands
Strategic Plans must be devised to achieve PEOs.
Assessment methods must be formulated to check
whether University has achieved the devised PEOs or not.
28

29. CRITERION 1 - PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL
OBJECTIVES (PEOS)
UNIVERSITY VISION
UNIVERSITY MISSION
PROGRAM MISSION
PEOs (Mapped to Vision, Mission)
Strategic Plan to Achieve PEOs
PEOs’ Assessment Methods
Process of Revision of PEOs
29

30. CRITERION 1 - PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL
OBJECTIVES (PEOS)
University’s Vision and Mission
PEOs
1 2 3 4
Vision
Mission
MAPPING OF PEOS TO VISION & MISSION
30

31. CONTINUOUS QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
(CQI) OF PEOS
31

32. CRITERION 2: PROGRAM LEARNING
OUTCOMES
(PLOS)
Program Learning outcomes or graduate attributes are the
narrower statements that describe what students are expected
to know and be able to do at the end of the program or at the
time of graduation.
12 PLOs have been provided by PEC to be adopted for all
Universities.
•An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, engineering fundamentals and an
engineering specialization to the solution of complex engineering problems.
PLO1: Engineering Knowledge
•An ability to identify, formulate, research literature, and analyze complex engineering problems
reaching substantiated conclusions using first principles of mathematics, natural sciences and
engineering sciences.
PLO2: Problem Analysis
•An ability to design solutions for complex engineering problems and design systems,
components or processes that meet specified needs with appropriate consideration for public
health and safety, cultural, societal, and environmental considerations.
PLO3: Design/Development of Solutions
32

33. CRITERION 2: PROGRAM LEARNING
OUTCOMES
(PLOS)
•An ability to investigate complex engineering problems in a methodical way including literature
survey, design and conduct of experiments, analysis and interpretation of experimental data,
and synthesis of information to derive valid conclusions.
PLO4: Investigation
•An ability to create, select and apply appropriate techniques, resources, and modern
engineering and IT tools, including prediction and modeling, to complex engineering activities,
with an understanding of the limitations.
PLO5: Modern Tool Usage
•An ability to apply reasoning informed by contextual knowledge to assess societal, health,
safety, legal and cultural issues and the consequent responsibilities relevant to professional
engineering practice and solution to complex engineering problems.
PLO6: The Engineer and Society
•An ability to understand the impact of professional engineering solutions in societal and
environmental contexts and demonstrate knowledge of and need for sustainable development.
PLO7: Environment and Sustainability
33

34. CRITERION 2: PROGRAM LEARNING
OUTCOMES
(PLOS)
•Apply ethical principles and commit to professional ethics and responsibilities and norms of engineering
practice.
PLO8: Ethics
•An ability to work effectively, as an individual or in a team, on multifaceted and /or multidisciplinary
settings
PLO9: Individual and Teamwork
•An ability to communicate effectively, orally as well as in writing, on complex engineering activities with
the engineering community and with society at large, such as being able to comprehend and write
effective reports and design documentation, make effective presentations, and give and receive clear
instructions.
PLO10: Communication
•An ability to demonstrate management skills and apply engineering principles to one’s own work, as a
member and/or leader in a team, to manage projects in a multidisciplinary environment.
PLO11: Project Management
•An ability to recognize importance of, and pursue lifelong learning in the broader context of innovation
and technological developments.
PLO12: Lifelong Learning
34

35. CRITERION 2: PROGRAM LEARNING
OUTCOMES
(PLOS)
PLOs
Mapping of PLOs to PEOs
Mapping of Courses to PLOs
Assessment Methods of PLOs
Quantification of PLOs
35

36. CRITERION 2: PROGRAM LEARNING
OUTCOMES
(PLOS)
MAPPING OF PLOS
TO PEOS
Program Learning
Outcomes (PLOs)
PEOs Performan
ce
Indicator
PEO
1
PEO
2
PEO
3
PEO
4
PLO
1
Engineering
Knowledge
PLO
2
Problem Analysis
PLO
3
Design/Develop
ment of
Solutions
36

37. CRITERION 2: PROGRAM LEARNING
OUTCOMES
(PLOS)
MAPPING OF PLOS TO COURSES
BS Electrical Engineering
Courses
Engineering
Knowledge
Problem
Analysis
Design/Development
of
Solutions
Investigation
Modern
Tool
Usage
The
Engineering
and
Society
Environment
and
Sustainability
Ethics
Individual
and
Team
Work
Communication
Project
Management
Lifelong
Learning
Sr.
No.
Cours
e
Code
Cours
e
Title
PLO1
PLO2
PLO3
PLO4
PLO5
PLO6
PLO7
PLO8
PLO9
PLO10
PLO11
PLO12
1
EE-
101
Engineering
Workshop
2
EE-
102
Electric
Circuits
3
MT-
101
Calculus &
Analytical
Geometry 37

38. ASSESSMENT OF PLOS VIA
CLOS
For each specific course Course Learning Outcomes
(CLOs) are defined which are accordingly mapped to
PLOs.
For each course, CLOs are devised using Bloom’s
Taxonomy that involves three learning domains:
1. Cognitive Domain
2. Affective Domain
3. Psychomotor Domain
38

39. DEVISING COURSE LEARNING
OUTCOMES (CLOS)
Bloom’s Taxonomy:
Cognitive Domain
Level 6: Evaluation
Level 5: Synthesis
Level 4: Analysis
Level 3: Application
Level 2: Comprehension
Level 1: Knowledge
39

40. DEVISING COURSE LEARNING
OUTCOMES (CLOS)
Bloom’s Taxonomy: Cognitive Domain
Level Code Category
Behavior
description
Examples of
activity
Action Verbs
1 C1 Knowledge
The ability to
recall what
has been
learnt
Recall a
process, rules,
definitions;
quote law or
procedure.
Identify,
match, list,
memorize,
recognize,
reproduce,
state
2 C2
Comprehensi
on
The ability to
show a basic
understandin
g
Student grasps
the meaning
behind the
information
and interprets,
translates or
comprehends
the information
Convert,
Discuss,
estimate,
explain, locate,
summarize,
reference,
example,
interpret
3 C3 Application
The ability to
apply
learning to a
Student uses
information to
relate or to
apply it to a
new situation
Use, apply,
discover,
manage,
execute, solve,
perform,
conduct,
40

41. DEVISING COURSE LEARNING
OUTCOMES (CLOS)
Bloom’s Taxonomy: Cognitive Domain
Level Code Category
Behavior
description
Examples of
activity
Action Verbs
4 C4 Analysis
The ability to
break up
information
logically
Students
Identify
constituent
parts and
function of a
process or
concept, or
deconstruct a
methodology
Analyze,
compare,
contrast,
measure, test,
Differentiate,
distinguish,
infer,
investigate,
extrapolate,
graph, diagram
5 C5 Synthesis
The ability to
create
something new
Student
creatively
applies
knowledge and
analysis to
integrate
concepts
Assemble,
create,
construct,
design,
develop,
formulate,
synthesize
The ability
Student judges
or evaluates
information
Review, justify,
assess, present
41

42. DEVISING COURSE LEARNING
OUTCOMES (CLOS)
Bloom’s Taxonomy:
Affectiive Domain
Level 5: Characterizing
Level 4: Organizing
Level 3: Valuing
Level 2: Responding
Level 1: Receiving
42

43. DEVISING COURSE LEARNING
OUTCOMES (CLOS)
Bloom’s Taxonomy: Affective Domain
Level Code Category
Behavior
description
Examples of
activity
Action Verbs
1 A1 Receiving
Open to
experience,
willing to hear
Listen to
teacher take
interest in
session
learning
Ask, listen,
attend,
describe,
follow,
concentrate,
discuss,
acknowledge
2 A2 Responding
React and
participate
actively
Students
exhibits a
recreation or
change as a
result of
exposure to an
attitude
Represent,
react, respond,
clarify, provide
other
references and
examples, cite,
write, perform
3 A3 Valuing
Attach values
and express
personal
opinions
Students
recognize value
and display this
through
involvement
Argue,
challenge,
debate, refute,
confront, justify,
criticize 43

44. DEVISING COURSE LEARNING
OUTCOMES (CLOS)
Bloom’s Taxonomy: Affective Domain
Level Code Category
Behavior
description
Examples of
activity
Action Verbs
4 A4
Organizing or
conceptualizing
values
Reconcile
internal
conflicts;
develop value
system
Students
determine the
new value or
behavior as
important or a
priority
Develop,
improve,
manipulate,
modify, practice
5 A5
Characterizing
or internalizing
values
Adopt belief
system and
philosophy
Students
integrate
consistent
behavior as a
neutralize value
in spite of
discomfort or
cost. The value
is recognized
as a part of
person
character
Act, display,
influence,
solve, practice,
defend,
validate, verify
44

45. DEVISING COURSE LEARNING
OUTCOMES (CLOS)
Bloom’s Taxonomy:
Psychomotor Domain
Level 6: Coach
Level 5: Apply
Level 4: Correct
Level 3: Recognize Standards
Level 2: Model
Level 1: Observe
45

46. DEVISING COURSE LEARNING
OUTCOMES (CLOS)
Bloom’s Taxonomy: Psychomotor Domain
Level Code Category
Behavior
description
Examples of
activity
Action Verbs
1 P1 Observe
Students
Translates
Sensory Input
into physical
tasks or
activities
Perform a task
from
instructions
Hear, Identify,
observe, see,
watch, touch
2 P2 Model
Students are
able to replicate
a fundamental
task or skill
Watch teacher
or trainer and
repeat action,
or activity
Imitate,
attempt, copy,
follow, model,
repeat,
reproduce
3 P3
Recognize
Standards
Student
recognize
standards or
criteria
important to
perform a skill
or task correctly
Perform a task
or activity with
expertise
without
assistance
Check, detect,
discriminate,
differentiate,
notice,
distinguish
46

47. DEVISING COURSE LEARNING
OUTCOMES (CLOS)
Bloom’s Taxonomy: Psychomotor Domain
Level Code Category
Behavior
description
Examples of
activity
Action Verbs
4 P4 Correct
Student use
standards to
evaluate their
own
performances
and make
corrections
Able to identify
and correct any
type of error in
an experiment
Correct, adapt,
alter, change,
develop,
improve,
manipulate
5 P5 Apply
Students apply
this skills to real
life situations
Define aim,
approach and
strategy for use
of activities to
meet strategic
need
Build,
compose,
construct,
create, design,
originate
6 P6 Coach
Students are
able to instruct
or train others
to perform this
skill in other
situations
Able to train
others
Demonstrate,
exhibit,
illustrate,
instruct, teach,
train
47

48. ASSESSMENT METHODS
The CLOs that in turn define the PLOs are assessed via
following methods:
Final Exam.
Sessional Exams.
Quizzes.
Assignments.
Projects.
Viva.
Presentation.
Class discussion / participation.
48

49. CONTINUOUS QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
(CQI) FOR PLOS
49

50. FORMULATION RELATION FLOW OF
PEOS, PLOS & CLOS INVOLVING
STAKEHOLDERS
50