Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Outcome Based Education and Assessment
Similar to Outcome Based Education and Assessment (20)
More from Vijay Kumar Jadon
More from Vijay Kumar Jadon (16)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Outcome Based Education and Assessment
- 1. Delivery to Outcome Vijay Kumar Professor and Dean Mechatronics Engineering Chitkara University Outcome Based Education and Assessment September 05, 2020 Chitkara University PO
- 2. 2 Introduction Mapping and Attainment Challenges and Recommendations OBE/OBA Discussionsβ¦.
- 3. Institutions Departments Schools Centres Affiliated Constituent Offers one or more programmes Support academic delivery, may or may not offer programmes Supports university/department/schools for related activities Course Curriculum Programme University to Course University Vision Vision is a futuristic statement that the institution/department would like to achieve over a long period of time. Mission Mission statements are essentially the means to achieve the vision A university offers undergraduate and postgraduate education, and undertake research for the award of academic degrees.
- 4. Course Curriculum Programme University to Course University Feedback Employer Alumni Students Faculty Draft Curriculum Policies Draft FrameworkPractices in Benchmark Institution Society Requirements Governing Council Academic Council Board of StudiesCurriculum PEOs
- 5. Course Curriculum Programme University to Course University Lecture Tutorial Practical Project Training Internship Seminar Case-Study Elective Open Elective Core Courses
- 6. Electives, Open Electives and CBCS Open Elective Elective CBCS
- 7. Course-1CO Course-2CO Course-nCO PO Desired Map is about What Students Learn OBE β Mapping and Attainment PO reflect the skills, knowledge and abilities of graduates regardless of the field of study NOT What we Teach
- 8. Creating Evaluating Analyzing Applying Understanding Remembering Bloom Taxonomy Major Project Minor Project Capstone Project Case Studies Industrial Training Examinations Assignments
- 9. Say what you want Do what you say Prove it Improve it CQI Continuous Education Quality Improvement APG TLP PO Attainment BOS/AC
- 10. Tools Frequency Assesse Reviewer PO Assignment Every Month Faculty CC Examination End of Semester Faculty Head Course FB End of Course Faculty In-charge (ACAD) Employer Yearly Head Institute Head Faculty Half Yearly In-charge (ACAD) Tools Frequency Assesse Reviewer PEO Employer FB Yearly Department Head/Rep In-charge (ACAD) Alumni FB Any Time Department Head/Rep In-charge (ACAD) Tools Frequency Assesse Reviewer CO Assignment Every Month Faculty CC/Head Examination End of Semester Faculty CC/Head Project etc. End of Course Faculty CC/Head IQAC Role - Assessment Tools Implementation
- 11. Mapping and Attainment Mission PO PO PO Prog-1 Prog-2 Prog-n Course-1 Course-2 Course-n CO CO CO
- 13. Program Outcome PO Competencies to be Attained CA Performance Indicators PI Assessment PO-1 CA-1.1 CA-1.2 CA-1.3 PI-1.1.1 PI-1.1.2 PI-1.1.3 PI-1.2.1 PI-1.2.2 PI-1.3.1 PI-1.3.2 PI-1.3.3 AssessmentTools (MidTerm/End Term/Assignments/Projectsetc.) Competencies and Performance Indicator
- 14. Course PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 PO7 --- Course-1 0.7 0.85 0 0.85 Course-2 * * * Course-3 * * * * Mapping POs PEO-I PEO-II PEO-III PEO-IV PO1 1.0 - 0.7 0.4 PO2 1.0 - -- 0.4 PO3 - 1.0 0.7 - PO4 - - 0.7 - PO5 - 0.4 0.5 0.4 PO6 - 1.0 - - PO7 0.7 0.4 0.5 - PO8 0.7 - - 0.7 0.85 0.7 PEOs M1 M2 M3 PEO-I H (1.0) H (1.0) L (0.4) PEO-2 H (1.0) M(0.7) H (1.0) PEO-3 H (1.0) H(1.0) M (0.7) PEO-4 H(1.0) H (1.0) H(1.0) COs PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 - Avg CO-1 M(0.7) M(0.7) 0.7 CO-2 H(1.0) H(1.0) 1.0 CO-3 L(0.4) H(1.0) 0.7 CO-4 H(1.0) M(0.7) 0.85 Avg 0.7 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.8125 CO-PO Mapping Course - PO Mapping PO-PEO Mapping PEO-Mission Mapping
- 15. DirectMethod β’ Examination β’ Assignments β’ Presentations β’ Projects β’ Quiz IndirectMethod β’ Course Outcome Feedback β’ Exit Student Feedback β’ Alumni Feedback β’ Employer Feedback β’ Other Assessment Methods
- 16. Performance Criterion-1 Performance Criterion-2 Performance Criterion-3 5 4 3 2 1RUBRIC DESIGN PERFORMANCE DESCRIPTION (associated characteristics) Assessment Methods: Rubric Rubrics should be communicated to the students Rubrics are tools for grading the studentβs performance and learning for a set of criteria and objectives. Performance Criteria are expectation and descriptions are possible achievements of the students PerformanceCriteria Project Training Internship Seminar Case-Study PO/PEO FB Scale
- 17. Needs Improvements Acceptable Proficient Purpose of the Project Does not clearly explain the intended outcome of the project or provides little information about the problem that was being solved, the need being met, or why the project was selected Provides a description of intended outcome of the project which includes information about the problem that was being solved or the need being met, and why the project was selected Provides a detailed intended outcome of the project which includes information about the problem that was being solved or the need being met, and clearly articulates the reasons and decision-making process used to select the project DESIGN PROJECTS Assessment Methods: Rubric
- 18. CO Attainment : Sample-1 Roll no. CO1 Scale 1 5 1 2 1 1 3 8.5 2 4 0 1 5 9 2 - - - 50 14 3 Range of marks Scale β₯ 10 3 β₯ 7 and < 10 2 < 7 1 Scale 1 2 3 Direct Students 8 25 17 1.6% 16 50 34 Roll no. CO2 Scale 1 15 3 2 12 3 3 8.5 1 4 11 2 5 9 1 - - - 50 14 3 Scale 1 2 3 Indirect Students 4 16 38 2.3% * * * Scale 1 2 3 Direct Students 12 16 22 2.2% 24 32 44 Scale 1 2 3 Indirect Students 2 16 32 2.6% 4 32 64 0.6*1.6+0.4*2.3 1.88 0.6*2.2+0.4*2.6 2.36 Q.No CO 1 1 2 1,2 3 2 4 3 5 2 6 1,3 Max Marks - 20 Q.No Marks 1 3 2 4 3 4 4 2 5 2 6 5 Max Marks - 20 Range of marks Scale β₯ 14 3 β₯ 10 and < 12 2 < 10 1 Setting Scale for CO is Course specific and choice of Instructor QuestionPaperStructure Marks Extracted Attainment Scale Attainment Computation πππππ Γ %ππ‘π’ππππ‘π 100
- 19. Roll no. CO1 Scale 1 5 2 2 1 1 3 8.5 4 4 0 1 5 5 2 6 10.5 5 7 14 5 Range of marks Score β₯11 to 20 5 β₯ 9 and < 11 4 β₯ 7 and < 9 3 β₯ 5 and < 7 2 β₯ 0 and < 5 1 Scale 1 2 3 4 5 Direct Students 7 6 8 15 15 3.49% 13.7 11.8 15.7 29.4 29.4 Roll no. CO2 Scale 1 5 2 2 1 1 3 8.5 4 4 0 1 5 5 2 6 10.5 5 7 14 5 Range of marks Score β₯ 14 to 20 5 β₯ 9 < 14 4 β₯ 7 and < 9 3 β₯ 5 and < 7 2 β₯ 0 and < 5 1 Scale 1 2 3 4 5 In-Direct Students 2 6 8 20 15 3.78% * * * * * Scale 1 2 3 4 5 Direct Students 4 8 8 24 7 3.43% * * * * * Scale 1 2 3 4 5 In-Direct Students 2 6 12 18 13 3.66% * * * * * 0.6*3.49+0.4*3.78 3.61 0.6*3.43+0.4*3.66 3.52 CO Attainment : Sample-2 Q.No CO 1 1 2 1,2 3 2 4 3 5 2 6 1,3 Max Marks - 20 Q.No Marks 1 3 2 4 3 4 4 2 5 2 6 5 Max Marks - 20 QuestionPaperStructure Marks Extracted Attainment Scale Attainment Computation πππππ Γ %ππ‘π’ππππ‘π 100
- 20. PO Attainment : Sample-1 Course CO-1 CO-2 CO-3 CO-4 Course-1 1.88 2.36 2.1 2.5 Course PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 --- Course-1 0.7 0.85 0 0.85 Course-2 * * * T-1: CO Attainment T-2: CO Attainment (Direct Method) T-4: Course - PO Mapping CO % students 1 2 3 CO1 16 50 34 CO2 24 32 44 CO Score PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 -- CO-1 0.36 0.25 0.31 0 0.31 CO-2 0.54 0.38 0.46 * 0.46 * T-3: CO Attainment (Indirect Method) CO % students 1 2 3 CO1 4 16 38 CO2 4 32 64 T-6: PO Attainment-CA CO Target : Students attaining Scale Level 3 contribute to PO attainment PO Target: PO score more than 60 % is considered as High Level of attainment Course PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 --- Course-1 Average value of each column of Course-2 T-5: Course - PO Attainment PO Attainment PO CA ET EFB AFB 50% 30% 10% 10% PO-1 PO-2 T-7: PO Attainment-ET Course PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 --- Course-1 Average value of each column of Course-2 PO Target: PO score more than 50 % is considered as High Level of attainment
- 21. Calculation based on: = 0.8x(Direct) + 0.2x(Indirect) Attainment of POs
- 22. PEOs - MISSION Articulation Matrix PEOs Excellence in Education and Research Technical Knowledge Base Indian values and Ethics PEO-I 0.8 0.5 - PEO-II 0.2 - 0.8 PEO-III 0.5 0.8 - PEO-IV - 0.8 - Attainment of Mission
- 23. Implementation Challenges How to frame Programme Outcomes and Course Outcomes? What is the correct CO-PO mapping? What is the right number of Course Outcomes? What is the optimum evaluation scheme for the Course? What is correct examination system for OBE/OBA? How to handle data with minimum efforts?
- 24. Recommendations Each Row and Column of CO-PO map be 20% more than the target Though the course outcome are course dependent, but still we can improvise these to limit between 3 to 6 Each continuous evaluation to address only one CO. It implies, that the number of assignments to equal to number of COs. The question paper ideally should not have any choice. In case, the choice is to be given, it should be between the questions of same COs. The question paper should have sections equal to the number of COs being evaluated through the examination. If followed in spirit, it has astounding results.
- 25. 25 Thanks