This document discusses the processes used to assess attainment of course and program outcomes at an engineering program. It describes how course outcomes are defined and mapped to program outcomes. Assessment tools like assignments, exams, and projects are mapped to outcomes. Attainment is calculated based on student performance and surveys. First year courses contribute to early outcome assessment. Actions are taken like improving questions and tutorials if outcomes are not fully attained.

1. NBA
Attainment of COs & POs
Dr. Shimi S.L ,
NITTTR, Chandigarh

2. 8.4 Attainment of Course Outcomes (10)
8.4.1 Describe the assessment processes used to gather the data upon which the
evaluation of Course Outcomes (5)
(Examples of data collection processes may include, but are not limited to, specific
exam questions, laboratory tests, internally developed assessment exams, oral exams
assignments, presentations, tutorial sheets etc.)
The course outcomes are defined by faculty and subject experts through workshops.
Define the assessment process (eg. MST..).
8.4.2 Record the attainment of Course Outcomes (5)
Program shall have set attainment levels.
(The attainment levels shall be set considering average performance levels in the
university examination or any higher value set as target for the assessment years.
Attainment level is to be measured in terms of student performance in internal
assessments with respect the COs of a subject plus the performance in the University
examination)

3. Programme
Outcomes
Assessment
Tools
a b c d e f g h i
Direct
Assessment
Tools
Assignments /
Seminars X X X X X X X
Sessional X X X X X X X
End Semester
Exams X X X X X X X
Pre-Thesis/
Thesis X X X X X X X X X
Indirect
Assessment
Tools
Alumni/Exit
Survey X X X X X X X X X
Contribution of Tools
3

4. Assessment Tools
Program
Outcomes
Courses considered Method of
Assessment
Source of data
collection
PO1- PO9 For each PO, the
contributing course is
obtained from Course
to PO mapping
Internal Evaluation
 Sessionals
 Assignments
 Seminars
External Evaluation
Result file
PO1-PO9 - Indirect
Assessment
Alumni/
Student Exit
Feedback
4

5. Direct Assessment
• To assess the attainment of the POs, Grade Point Average of
courses is considered
• PO attainment is evaluated as
𝑃𝑖 =
𝑘=1
𝑁
𝐺 𝑘 𝑆 𝑘 𝑊𝑖𝑘 𝐶 𝑘
𝑘=1
𝑁
10𝑆 𝑘 𝑊𝑖𝑘 𝐶 𝑘
where
Gk = Grade Point Average of kth Course
Sk = Number of students taking kth Course
Wik = Weight assigned for kth Course mapped to ith PO.
Ck = Total credits of kth Course
N = Number of Courses
5

7. Weightage(Wik) Computation
• Weightage is assigned based on %age of COs which are satisfying ith
PO in the kth subject as follows:
%age of COs Weightage
<33% 1
>=33% and <67% 2
>=67% 3
7

9. 9
Rubrics used:
1. Relevance of Program Outcomes
It is evaluated taking five different scales: Not Important (1),
Somewhat Important (2), Important (3), Very Important (4),
Extremely Important (5)
2. Usefulness of Program Outcomes
It is evaluated on four different scales: Less than 40% (1),
40-60% (2), 60-80% (3), 80-100% (4)
Number in bracket shows weightage assigned to that scale.
Process Used for Indirect
Assessment of Attainment of POs

10. S.No. Programme
outcome
Relevance Usefulness
Not
Imp.
S.W.
Imp.
Imp. V.
Imp.
Ex.
Imp.
Less
than 40
40 to 60 60 to 80 80 to
100
1. A
2. B
3. C
4. D
5. E
6. F
7. G
8. H
9. I
IndirectAssessment of POs through
Alumni Feedback
10

11. 11
Assessment of ith PO on the basis of Relevance:
𝑃𝑖(𝑅) = 𝑠=1
5 𝑁𝑠∗𝑊𝑠
𝑁×5
Assessment of ith PO on the basis of Usefulness:
𝑃𝑖(𝑈) = 𝑠=1
4 𝑁𝑠∗𝑊𝑠
𝑁×4
Here
Ns = Number of students who agree on scale s
Ws = Weightage assigned to scale s
N = Total number of students
𝑃𝑖 𝐼 = 0.5𝑃𝑖 𝑅 + 0.5𝑃𝑖(𝑈)
Process Used for Indirect Assessment of
Attainment of POs (Contd..)

12. PO Attainment
• As the Direct assessment (student result) is computed on the basis of various parameters
(sessionals, assignments, university exams, projects, seminars etc.), it has been given a
weightage of 70%.
• On the other hand, Indirect Assessment is computed on the basis of feedback in the form
of questionnaire, so it has been given a weightage of 30%.
PO Attainment = 0.7*Direct PO attainment +0.3*Indirect PO Attainment
12

13. 8.5 Attainment of Program Outcomes from first year
courses (20)
8.5.1 Indicate results of evaluation of each relevant PO and/ or PSO, if
applicable (15)
(Describe the assessment processes that demonstrate the degree to which
the Program Outcomes are attained through first year courses and
document the attainment levels. Also include information on assessment
processes used to gather the data upon which the evaluation of each
Program Outcome is based indicating the frequency with which these
processes are carried out)

29. Direct assessment of POs is evaluated on the attainment of COs which is based on
internal assessment weightage - 25% and final examination weightage - 75%.
Internal Evaluation: Theory courses 2 MST with 20 marks each + 1 assignment for 5
mark.
The question papers are set such a way the two midterm exams and assignment
cover all the COs stated.
Marks are evaluated on CO basis. MST has 2 parts ;
Part A contains 3 questions of 2 marks each which are compulsory.
Part B consists of 3 questions of 7 marks each out of which any two need to be
attempted.
The weightage of choice is distributed among COs accordingly.
Calculation Procedure ;
Average Assessment = sum of the marks obtained by all the students/ no of the
students

30. % Achievement =( Average assessment of each CO/ Max marks of that
CO) * 100
Choice percentage: (7/20) * 100 =35 (as choice is one question with 7
marks out of 20 marks)
Choice percentage contribution: (Part B marks of a given CO /21)* 35
Effective % : % Achievement + choice percentage contribution.
Note: In case if two mid exams address same CO the weighted average
is taken as the effective percentage in the assessment of The CO.
Weighted average = (max marks of the CO in Ist Mid * Effective % +
max marks of that CO in IInd Mid * Effective %) /
sum of maximum marks of that CO in I and II mid

31. 8.5.2. Actions taken based on the results of evaluation of relevant POs (5)
(The attainment levels by direct (student performance) are to be presented
through Program level Course-PO matrix as indicated)
Program Outcome 1:
Observations: 1. It is observed that the PO1 is moderately attained. 2. It is observed that the PO1 had
improved when compared to previous year (1.52 to 1.54) 3. Engineering Chemistry, Introduction to
Computing and Problem Solving courses contributed lesser to PO1.
Action plan: 1. Cognitive level of tutorial questions needs to be improved and separate notebooks
should be maintained for the tutorial sessions. 2. Allocate two faculties for the tutorial sessions to
provide more individual attention to the students. 3. Answers need to be discussed and answer key for
unsolved problems are to be distributed among the students. 4. Identify the weak students and arrange
remedial classes. 5. Use Moodle to do additional activities like assignments, quizzes, reading
assignments etc.

32. Questions, Comments?
Shimi.reji@gmail.com
www.slideshare.net/shimireji
9417588987
Thanks