This handbook will provide guidelines

to frame learning outcomes ,assessment

planning and evaluation for improving
an academic program.

Academic
Program
Assessment
Handbook
Guidelines Document

IQAC-JSCOE
 Jaywant Shikshan Prasarak Mandal

Academic Program Assessment

Handbook
(Guidelines Document)

Jayawantrao Sawant College of Engineering, Pune

(Approved by AICTE & Affiliated to Savitribai Phule Pune University)

 Guidelines and Procedures

This handbook is designed to assist faculty and administrators with the

process of developing and/or revising expected learning outcomes and
methods for assessing those outcomes in their degree programs. This
handbook begins by providing basic information related to

(1) Concept related to assessment

(2) Course-level outcomes;
(3) Program-level outcomes;
(4) Assessing course and program level outcome
(5) Ways assessment data can or should be used to make improvements
to degree programs.
 Contents

Sr.No Particulars Pg. No.

1. Institute vision, mission and objectives 1

2. Basic Terminology related to Assessment 4

3. Administrative Setup for Assessment 7

Implementation

4. Framing Course Outcome(CO) 13

5. Mapping of CO with PO and PSO 18

6. Assessment Tools and Evaluation Process 21

7. CO attainment Process 28

8. PO and PSO attainment Process 37

Definitions

References
DEPARTMENT
OF
-----------------
ENGINEERING
A.Y.2017-18
 1. Institute Vision, Mission and Objectives

1.1 VISION

"To satisfy the aspirations of youth force, who wants to lead the
nation towards prosperity through techno-economic development".

1.2 MISSION

"To provide, nurture and maintain an environment of high academic

excellence, research, and entrepreneurship for all aspiring students,
which will prepare them to face global challenges maintaining high
ethical and moral standards".

1.3 OBJECTIVES:
1. To provide quality education to students and nurture them for a professional
career.
2. To increase the number of students progressing in higher education and
entrepreneurship.
3. To make the students engaged in lifelong learning for accepting socio-economic
responsibilities.
4. To promote students for research and adopting recent trends in technology
among all disciplines.
5. To enhance the proficiency and excellence of teachers

1.4 QUALITY POLICY

“To imbibe global standards of excellence in endeavors of Institute and to adhere with
accountability towards society through best practices and techno economic prudence”.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 1
1.5 PROGRAM OUTCOMES

PO 1: Engineering knowledge: Apply the knowledge of mathematics, science,

engineering fundamentals, and an engineering specialization for the solution of complex
engineering problems.

PO 2: Problem analysis: Identify, formulate, research literature, and analyse complex

engineering problems reaching substantiated conclusions using first principles of
mathematics, natural sciences, and engineering sciences.

PO 3: Design/Development of Solutions: Design solutions for complex engineering

problems and design system components or processes that meet the specified needs
with appropriate consideration for public health and safety, and cultural, societal, and
environmental considerations.

PO 4: Conduct investigations of complex problems: Use research-based knowledge and

research methods including design of experiments, analysis and interpretation of data,
and synthesis of the information to provide valid conclusions.

PO 5: Modern tool usage: Create, select, and apply appropriate techniques, resources,
and modern engineering and IT tools including prediction and modelling to complex
engineering activities with an understanding of the limitations

PO 6: The engineer and society: Apply reasoning informed by the contextual knowledge
to assess societal, health, safety, legal, and cultural issues and the consequent
responsibilities relevant to the professional engineering practice.

PO 7: Environment and sustainability: Understand the impact of the professional

engineering solutions in societal and environmental contexts, and demonstrate the
knowledge of, and need for sustainable development.

PO 8: Ethics: Apply ethical principles and commit to professional ethics and

responsibilities and norms of the engineering practice

IQAC-JSCOE Page 2
PO 9: Individual and team work: Function effectively as an individual, and as a member
or leader in diverse teams, and in multidisciplinary settings.

PO 10: Communication: Communicate effectively on complex engineering activities

with the engineering community and with the 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

PO 11: Project management and finance: Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of

the engineering and management principles and apply these to one’s own work, as a
member and leader in a team, to manage projects and in multidisciplinary
environments.

PO 12: Life-long learning: Recognize the need for, and have the preparation and ability
to engage in independent and life-long learning in the broadest context of technological
change.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 3
 2. Basic Terminology related to Assessment

2.1 BASIC TERMINOLOGY

a. Assessment-Assessment is the systematic and ongoing method of gathering,
analyzing and using information from measured outcomes to improve student
learning.
b. Assessment Method - this term refers to any technique or activity that is used to
investigate what students are learning or how well they are learning.
c. .Assessment Plan – the proposed methods and timeline for assessment-related
activities in a given course (e.g., when are you going to check what/how well the
students are learning and how are you going to do that?).
d. Course-Level Assessment – this type of assessment focuses on what students are
learning in a certain course within a program. Course-level assessment can focus on
either a single section of a course or all sections of the same course. Course-level
assessment data can be used as one source of information for program level
assessment.
e. Program Assessment-When developing and implementing assessment strategies,
academic units should have at least one of three purposes in mind: to improve, to
inform, and/or to prove. The results from an assessment process should provide
information that can be used to determine whether or not program outcomes are
being achieved and how the programs can be improved. An assessment process
should also be designed to inform departmental faculty and other decision-makers
about relevant issues that can impact the program and student learning.
f. Learning Outcome - what the program faculty intend students to be able to know,
do, or think upon completion of a degree program (synonyms for “program
outcome” include learning outcome, learning outcome statement, exemplary
educational outcomes, and expected learning outcome).
g. Direct Assessment Method - direct measures of student learning require students
to display their actual knowledge and skills (rather than report what they think their
knowledge and skills are). Examples of direct assessment methods include objective
tests, essays, presentations, and classroom assignments.
IQAC-JSCOE Page 4
h. Indirect Assessment Method - indirect assessment asks students to reflect on their
learning rather than to demonstrate it. Examples include external reviewers, course
end survey, student exit surveys, exit interviews, alumni surveys, employer surveys,
etc.
i. Formative Assessment – assessment that occurs during a learning experience.
This type of assessment allows faculty and administrators to make adjustments to
the learning experience to increase student learning. Examples include midterm
exams in the middle of a course, focus groups at the midpoint in a degree program,
etc.
j. Summative Assessment – assessment that occurs at the end of a course completion
(e.g., a comprehensive exam at the end of a semester etc.).
k. Rubric - a scoring and instruction tool used to assess student performance using a
task-specific range or set of criteria. To measure student performance against this
pre-determined set of criteria, a rubric contains the essential criteria for the task
and levels of performance (i.e., from poor to excellent) for each criterion.
l. Target (criterion): Desired level of student performance on a particular learning
outcome, stated explicitly in an assessment report, and set before assessment of
course or program learning outcomes is conducted.

2.2 WHY ASSESS?

Assessment can facilitate improvement through variety of venues. When faculty

members are directly considering what worked well and what didn’t, and involved in
the development, implementation, and using those observations and impressions to
make analysis of assessment activities, a number of specific changes in your curriculum.

2.1.1 Who is responsible for assessment?

Assessment is not the sole responsibility of any one faculty member or administrator.
The best assessment plans include a variety of professionals from various walks of life.
Assessment is the responsibility of the management, faculty, and department. Program-
level assessment is the responsibility of all of the faculty, administrators, and university
for any given degree program.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 5
2.1.2 Purposes of program assessment

The four main purposes of program assessment are:

To improve – the assessment process should provide feedback to determine how the
program can be improved.

To inform – the assessment process should inform faculty and other decision makers
of the contributions and impact of the program.

To prove – the assessment process should encapsulate and demonstrate to students,

faculty, staff and outsiders what the program is accomplishing.

To support – the assessment process should provide support for institute decision-
making activities such as program review and strategic planning, as well as external
accountability activities such as accreditation.

2.1.3 What are the steps to effective program assessment?

Ultimately, the purpose of program assessment approach to respond to departmental

goals and timelines, taking into account internal expectations, external requirements, or
both. In general, however, department will complete the following steps to develop an
effective program assessment plan: Checklist to better learning:

 Agree on your mission

 Create goals for program outcomes and processes
 Identify related activities for each goal
 Brainstorm appropriate measures
 Evaluate and select measures
 Identify appropriate assessment methods
 Develop a plan for collecting data
 Prioritize goals
 Set timeline, milestones
 Implement assessment plan
 Use data to improve processes
 Communicate results

IQAC-JSCOE Page 6
 3. Administrative Setup for Assessment
Implementation

3.1 The administrative system for implementation of Assessment consists of

coordinators and committees. There are three committees responsible for effective
implementation which helps in ensuring the achievements of the PEOs/POs/PSOs.

Fig 3.1 Administrative Setup

Internal Quality Assurance Cell (IQAC)

Chairman: - Principal
Members
1. Head of Departments
2. NBA Coordinator / NBA Program Coordinators
3. Management representative
4. Student representative

IQAC-JSCOE Page 7
Functions of IQAC
1. Formulate Vision and Mission of the institute.
2. Approves Vision, Mission and PEOs of departments
3. Approval to necessary requirements for implementation of OBE system
4. Proposes necessary changes for improvements.
5. Act as a guiding and monitoring body for all departments committees and teams.

3.2 Departmental Advisory Board (DAB)

DAB is basic constituent of the academic system
 The composition and of the DAB:
i. Chairman: Head of the concerned department
ii. Members:
1. Member secretary: Programme NBA Coordinator:
2. Internal members: Two senior faculty members of department.
3. Industry representative: One representative from industry/corporate
sector/allied area relating to placement.
4. Module coordinators
5. Course coordinators
6. One academician outside college.
7. One meritorious alumnus.
8. One parent.
9. One student.
The term of the nominated members shall be two years. Principal shall decide the
schedule for meeting of the DAB for different departments. The meeting may be
scheduled as and when necessary, but at least once a year.

 Functions of DAB
1. Drafting of Vision, Mission of department
2. Drafting of PEOs, Formulation of POs/PSOs
3. Defines current and future issues related to programme.
4. Develop/recommends new or revised PEOs/PSOs
5. Recommends the proposals/requirements for effective implementation of OBE

IQAC-JSCOE Page 8
 6. Define various assessment tools for measuring outcomes
7. Evaluates the attainment of PEOs, POs/PSOs and proposes necessary
improvements

3.3 Program Assessment Committee (PAC)

i. Chair: Programme Coordinator

ii. Members:
1. Module coordinators
2. Faculty representatives
 Functions of PAC
1. Evaluates and monitors the attainment of POs/PSOs
2. Proposes necessary changes for continuous improvements.
3. Preparation of periodic reports on programme related activities, status reports
for management and key stakeholders.
4. Faculty motivation: Attend/organize workshop/seminar/FDP, paper
publication, development of models/lab.
5. Student motivation: Attend/participate tech competitions, paper presentation,
mini projects/models, social/cultural events, skill development programs.
6. Conduct surveys, interaction with faculty, coordinators and other stakeholders
7. Planning of co-curricular activities for attainment of POs/PSOs

3.4 Programme Coordinator:

The duties, responsibilities and regulations of coordinators are as follows:
i) Schedules programme work in accordance with PEOs and POs/PSOs.
ii) Oversees daily operations and coordinate activities of programme
interrelated with activities of other programmes to ensure optimum
efficiency and compliance with appropriate policies and specifications
given by HOD.
iii) Monitor and reviews activities of each year in the programme
independently with course coordinators.
iv) Interacts with key stake holders, students, faculty, HOD and employers.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 9
 v) Conduct and interprets various surveys require to assess PEOs and
POs/PSOs.
3.5 Focus Group (FG)
Chair: Module Coordinator
Members:
1. Course coordinators.
2. Programme coordinator.
3. Student representative.
4. Industry representative.
5. Alumni representative
 Functions of Focus Group (FG)
1. Verification and approval of curriculum gaps and content beyond syllabi
2. Methodology and assessment tools to bridge the gaps
3. Approval to co-curricular activities
4. Evaluates the attainment of POs/PSOs and Cos

3.6 Module Committee (MC)

i. Chair: Module Coordinator
ii. Members: Course coordinators

 Functions of Module Committee (MC)

1. Formation of COs and TLOs
2. Formulation of curriculum gap and content beyond syllabi
3. Semester planning for course delivery, design contest, workshop, expert lectures,
site visits, mini projects
4. Evaluates and monitors the attainment of COs, TLOs
5. Proposes necessary changes for continuous improvements.
6. Preparation of periodic reports on course related activities, status reports for
management and key stakeholders.
7. Student motivation: Attend/participate tech competitions, paper presentation,
mini projects/models, social/cultural events, skill development programs.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 10
3.6.1 Module Coordinator:
The duties, responsibilities and regulations of coordinators are as follows:
i) Coordinate and supervise the faculty teaching the courses in the module
ii) Assessment of COs.
iii) Recommend and facilitates workshop/guest lectures/seminar/FDP to
meet the COs.
iv) Analyse the attainment of COs of a particular course and recommends
programme coordinator to take appropriate action for improvements.
v) Interact with students, faculty, Programme Coordinator and Head of
Department to determine priorities and policies for improvements.

3.6.2 Course Coordinator:

The duties, responsibilities and regulations of coordinators are as follows:
i) Plan, implement, monitor and review Topic Learning Outcomes (TLOs)
and Course Outcomes (COs).
ii) Evaluation of COs.
iii) Suggest improvements based on attainment of COs.

3.6.3. Course teacher

The functions and duties of course teacher are:

i. Conduct classes as per the time table issued by the HoD and maintain all
academic records (Attendance on moodle, Evaluation, Attainment) for that
course.
ii. Prepare course delivery and evaluation plan for student performance and
distribute to all the students within the first week of each semester.
iii. Display students’ performance in attendance and evaluation as stipulated in the
academic RRs.
iv. Report to the HOD on a periodic (monthly) basis, the potential cases of very
poor academic performance as well as those of low attendance.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 11
v. Submit Class Test Marks / Assignment / Teamwork marks to PAC as per the
schedule in academic calendar.
vi. Document all academic records in the course book in a format specified by Dean
IQAC and submit it for academic audit.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 12
 4. Framing Course Outcomes

4.1 Course Outcomes (COs)

COs are statements indicating what a student can do after the successful completion of a
course. Every Course leads to some Course Outcomes. The CO statements are defined by
considering the course content covered in each unit of a course.

• It states both the substance of learning and how its attainment is to be

demonstrated.

• It is a formal statement that articulate:

– The knowledge, skills/abilities, and attributes we want our students to be

able to demonstrate.

4.2 Before Writing course Outcomes

• Think about the 4-9 most important things that students should learn in the
course.

• Focus on high-level, broad framing outcomes instead of specific, discreet things

that students will learn.

• The COs should be the big-picture knowledge and skills that students should
have when they successfully complete a course.

4.3 Writing effective learning outcome statements

Selection of Action Words for course Outcome Statements: When stating student
learning outcomes, it is important to use verbs that describe exactly what the learner(s)
will be able to know or do upon completion of the degree program.

Many degree programs want to incorporate words that reflect critical or higher-order
thinking into their learning outcome statements. Bloom (1956) developed a taxonomy
outlining the different types of thinking skills people use in the learning process.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 13
4.4 Bloom’s Taxonomy

Benjamin Bloom was working along with a group of measurement specialists in early
1950s on the development of a taxonomy of learning.

 In 1956, the group produced “Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The

Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain.” (Bloom,
Engelhart, Furst, Hill, & Krathwohl,1956). This became quite popular and was
generally called “The Handbook.”
 After a similar process of discussions involving several experts, a major revision
was proposed in 2001. Anderson, Krathwohl et. al. (Eds): “A Taxonomy for
Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of
Educational Objectives”

A. Bloom’s Taxonomy: Learning Domains

 Any given task tends to be generally dominant in one of the three psychological
domains: cognitive, affective, or psychomotor.
 The cognitive domain deals with a person's ability to process and utilize
information in a meaningful way.
 The affective domain relates to the attitudes and feelings that result from or
influence the learning process.
 The psychomotor domain involves manipulative or physical skills.
 This classification is for focus and convenience; all the three dimensions are
involved to varying degrees in all intended learning experiences and activities.
B. Blooms Level:

1. Remember – recalling relevant terminology, specific facts, or different

procedures related to information and/or course topics. At this level, a student can
remember something, but may not really understand it.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 14
Blooms Blooms Taxonomy terms
level no

Fig 4.1 Bloom’s Taxonomy

2. Understand – the ability to grasp the meaning of information (facts, definitions,
concepts, etc.) that has been presented.

3. Apply – being able to use previously learned information in different situations

or in problem solving.

4. Analyze – the ability to break information down into its component parts.
Analysis also refers to the process of examining information in order to make
conclusions regarding cause and effect, interpreting motives, making inferences, or
finding evidence to support statements/arguments.

5. Evaluate – being able to judge the value of information and/or sources of

information based on personal values or opinions.

6. Create – the ability to creatively or uniquely apply prior knowledge and/or skills
to produce new and original thoughts, ideas, processes, etc. At this level, students
are involved in creating their own thoughts and ideas.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 15
c. List of action words related to critical thinking skills

Remember Understand Apply Analyze Evaluate Create

Describe Classify Choose Categorize Appraise Combine

Define Defend Explain Classify Judge Compose
Label, List Demonstrate Generalize Compare Criticize Construct
Locate Distinguish Judge Differentiate Compare Design
Match Explain Organize Distinguish Assess Develop
Name ,Omit Express Prepare Identify Conclude Formulate
Recite ,Select Extend Produce Infer Contrast Hypothesiz
State ,Count Give Examples Select Select Critique e
Draw Outline Summarize Show Survey Determine Invent
Discuss Solve Arrange Grade
Estimate Classify Breakdown Justify
Complete Combine Measure
Compute Detect Rank
Discover Diagram Rate
Discriminate Support
Illustrate Test

4.5 Structure of a CO statement

 Action: Represents a cognitive/ affective/ psychomotor activity the learner
should perform. Action is indicated by an action verb, occasionally two,
representing the concerned cognitive process (es).
 Knowledge: Represents the specific knowledge from any one or more of the
eight knowledge Categories
 Condition: Represents the process the learner is expected to follow or the
condition under which to perform the action (This is an optional element of CO)
 Criteria: Represent the parameters that characterize the acceptability levels of
performing the action (This is an optional element of CO)
4.6 How to write course outcome statements
• Write in the future tense – ‘by the end of this course, students will be able to…’

IQAC-JSCOE Page 16
 • Don’t try to use outcomes to replace your syllabus – identify the most important
things you want the students to learn, and try keep the number of outcomes to
between 4 and 6 .

• Make sure that your outcomes are achievable and assessable – think about
how you might assess the outcomes as you write them and excise any which are
vague, unclear or un-assessable .(Avoid verbs such as “understand,” “appreciate,”
and “value,” which are not observable or measurable.)

• Try to use language that students will understand – try to avoid jargon and
abbreviations. It should be limited to one verb .

• Include process as well as product – try not to make the outcome match the
product, rather use the outcome to show what process you expect students to
undertake.

• Write at the appropriate cognitive level for the course

• Have a balance of different types of outcome.

Sample COs Course: Software Modeling and Design

After the completion of the course, students will be able to

Choose between available technologies and devices for stated IoT

CO312.1
challenge
Design an application using UML Static modeling as fundamental
CO312.2
tool.
Design an application using UML Dynamic modeling as fundamental
CO312.3
tool.
CO312.4 Evaluate appropriate modern tool for designing and modeling
CO312.5 Apply design patterns to understand reusability in OO design.
Apply appropriate modern testing tool for testing web-
CO312.6
based/desktop application

IQAC-JSCOE Page 17
 5.Mapping of CO with PO and PSO

5.1 Correlation of CO with PO, PEO

FIG 5.1 Correlation of CO with PO, PEO

5.2. Steps involved in CO-PO Mapping.

1. CO Formulation process: For each course, subject teacher formulate the course
outcome and assign appropriate blooms level. The CO statements are defined by
considering the course content covered in each module of a course. For every course
there may be 5 or 6 COs.

2. CO mapping with PO and PSO: All the courses together must cover all the POs (and
PSOs). For a course, map the COs to POs through the CO-PO matrix and to PSOs through
the CO-PSO matrix as shown below. The various correlation levels are:

 “1” – Slight (Low) Correlation

IQAC-JSCOE Page 18
  “2” – Moderate (Medium) Correlation

 “3” – Substantial (High) Correlation

 “-” indicates there is no correlation.

3. A sample CO-PO Course Articulation matrix

Table 5.1 CO-PO matrix

COURSE
COURSE/ OUTCO PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 PO7 PO8 PO9 PO10 PO11 PO12 PSO1 PSO2 PSO3
CLASS
SUBJECT MES

M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
2 1 1 - 1 2 - - 1 1 - 2 1 - -
CO1

3 2 2 - 1 1 - - 1 1 - 1 1 - -
CO2

2 2 2 - - 2 - - 2 2 - 2 1 - -
CO3
TE XYZ
3 2 2 1 1 1 - - 1 2 - 2 1 - -
CO4

2 1 1 - - 1 - - 1 1 - 1 1 - -
CO5

2 2 2 - 1 1 - - - - - 1 1 - -
CO6

2.33 1.67 1.67 1.00 1.00 1.33 - - 1.20 1.40 - 1.50 1.00 - -
AVG

 It is necessary to determine the level (mapping strength) at which a particular

PO/PSO is addressed by the course.
 Subject teacher can estimate the mapping strengths between specific COs and
POs/PSOs based on subjective perception, taking into account the expected
cognitive level, as well as the nature of the course content. Such estimated values
can be entered into the matrix.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 19
4. Mapping of assessment with CO, PO and PSO
The course teacher prepare list of test paper ,assignments .All questions are mapped
with appropriate Blooms level, CO, PO,PSO. The analysis of distribution of cognitive
level is done. The assessment purpose is to measure the stated course outcome of
student; hence assessment tool is selected properly and aligned with CO.

Fig 5.2 Sample Question Paper

IQAC-JSCOE Page 20
 6. Assessment Tools and Evaluation Process

6.1 Assessment methods

• Assessment methods are tools and techniques used to determine the extent to
which the stated learning outcomes are achieved. A variety of methods,
qualitative and quantitative, direct and indirect, should be used.
6.2 Assessment tools

Tools used for course assessment are Direct Assessment Tools and Indirect Assessment
Tools.

Examples of Direct Assessment Examples of Indirect Assessment

Methods: Methods:

• Comprehensive exams • Peer institutions comparison

• Performance assessment • Job placement
• Writing proficiency exams • Employer surveys
• Field Achievement Tests • Performance in institute
• GRE subject exams • Student graduation/retention rates
• Certification exams, Exit interviews
• Internal tests • Focus group discussions
• Mini project • Alumni surveys Tracking of alumni
• Portfolio evaluation awards, achievements (national,
• Internship evaluations state, international, etc.)
• Grading with scoring rubrics* • Curriculum/syllabus analysis

6.3 Sample Assessment Methods used at department

1. Written surveys and questionnaires - Asking individuals to share their perceptions

about a particular area of interest—e.g., their own or others' skills/attitudes/behavior,

IQAC-JSCOE Page 21
or program/course qualities and attributes.

2. Exit and other interviews - Asking individuals to share their perceptions about a
particular area, of interest—e.g., their own skills/attitudes, skills and attitudes of others,
or program qualities— in a face-to-face dialog with an interviewer.

3. Commercial, norm-referenced, standardized examinations - Commercially developed

examinations, generally group administered, mostly multiple choices, "objective" tests,
usually purchased from a private vendor.

4. Locally developed assessments - Objective or subjective designed by local

staff/faculty.

5. Focus groups - Guided discussion of a group of people who share certain

characteristics related to the research or evaluation question, conducted by trained
moderator.

6. Portfolios (collections of work samples usually compiled over time and rated using
scoring rubrics).

7. Performance Appraisals - Systematic measurement of overt demonstration of

acquired skills, generally, through direct observation in a "real world" situation—e.g.,
while student is working on internship or on project for client.

8. External Examiner - Using an expert in the field from outside your program — usually
from a similar program at another institution — to conduct, evaluate, or supplement the
assessment of students.

9. Oral examinations - Evaluation of student knowledge levels through a face-to-face

dialogue between the student and the examiner—usually faculty.

6.4 Setting Course Outcome Targets

There are several ways to set target level. Course coordinator can decide target in
consultation with module coordinator. Following are few ways to set target.

a. To set the target level average mark criteria is used. Average marks of last three
exams can be taken into consideration and it should be kept as target average marks.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 22
b. If average marks of last exams are not available then current average marks can also
be considered as target level.
c. Target level can be different for each assessment method (e.g. Internal assessment:
assignment1, assignment2, class test1, class test2 etc. External assessment: End
Semester exam/university exam, Practical external exam)
d. Same target can be identified for all the COs of a course.

6.5 Definition of Attainment

Attainment can be defined as what percentage of students has above set target
marks .There are many ways to set attainment level. Course coordinator can select the
attainment criterion for a given course. E.g.
• Attainment Level 3: 60% of students score more than 60% marks out of the
maximum relevant marks.
• Attainment Level 2: 50% of students score more than 60% marks out of the
maximum relevant marks.
• Attainment Level 1: 40% of students score more than 60% marks out of the
maximum relevant marks.

6.6 Continuous Evaluation

To ensure effective academic progress and to decide corrective actions, continuous

internal evaluation is essential. Internal assessment broadly includes theory/objective
exam and student activity

1. Theory exam includes test, assignments and MCQs. Each of the questions is
mapped with CO and Bloom’s level. The proper attention is given to ensure the
weightage for each CO
2. Performance assessment in lab, projects and students’ activities are done
through well-defined performance rubric .

IQAC-JSCOE Page 23
Sr Method Tools for Type of Assessment Cycle
no. Assessment assessment

1 Direct Internal class Tests internal Two class tests per semester

2 Direct Assignments/Tutorial internal Assignments (as applicable)

3 Direct Practical evaluation internal Every practical batch per

practical per student

4 Direct Seminar/project internal Once per semester

evaluation

5 Direct University Exams External Once per semester

6 Indirect Course Exit Survey internal At the end of Semester

A. Continuous assessment in the laboratory

Performance based internal assessment of students is carried out on each assignment

during the regular Practical Session, lab reports are also written and evaluated on
regular basis.

Continuous Assessment of Experiment:

 Mapping of each experiments with one or more CO’s, POs and PSOs
 Elaboration of aim and scope of the each Lab assignment.
 Building of performance parameter along with rubrics.
 Implementation / conduction of assignment along with write-ups and
accordingly grading of performance parameter for individual students.
 The assessed marks are included in CO attainment calculation for respective lab
in respective theory subject

IQAC-JSCOE Page 24
Fig 6.1 describes the process adopted for internal evaluation and articulated as below :

Fig 6.1 Process for Internal Evaluation

IQAC-JSCOE Page 25
 6.7 Sample of Assessment Tools used to assess course outcomes
with target and weightage

Course Assessment
Set Target Weight age Attainment levels
Outcome Tools
Test 60% 30% No of students actively target =
Practical Rubric y =42
60%
C202.1 Experiment score 30% Total No of students =N=47
C202.2 CO attainment = (y/N) *
Assignment 60% 30%
C202.3 100=42/47*100=89.36
C202.4 Then attainment levels are
C202.5 0<AL0<40
Course end
C202.6 60% 10% 40<=AL1 <50
survey
50<=AL2<60
60<=AL3<=100

6.8 Targets and attainment levels

Assessment Tool type Outcome attainment

Target: 60% of max allotted marks.

Internal Assessment Tools
Authority: Course Coordinator

Target :University exam -60 % of max allotted Marks

External Assessment Tools
Authority: Program Assessment Committee

AL = % age no of students achieving target

 AL0 = 0-39%
Attainment levels  AL1=40-50%

 AL2=51 -60%

 AL3=61-100%

IQAC-JSCOE Page 26
 6.9 Overall Process of Internal Assessment is as shown in
flowchart:

Fig 6.2 Steps involved in Internal Assessment

IQAC-JSCOE Page 27
 7. CO Attainment Process

7.1 CO Assessment Plan (Direct-Internal Assessment):

For each course, assessment plan is prepared which includes mark

distribution, assessment tool for each course outcome.

Sample Assessment Plan

CO Assessment Process: Direct tools-Graded and Performance Rubrics(Internal)

Direct Graded Direct Non graded
Lab-Work
(Experiments) and Share of
Internal
Objective Tests Student Activities Each CO
Marks allocation

Test
(Assesses by
Unit

CO
Performance Rubrics)

Programming

Percentage
Presentation
OT 1 (25)

OT 2 (50)
IT 1 (25)

IT 2 (25)

Survey

Marks
EXPT

Poster
OT 3

OT 4

OT 5

OT 6

C308.1 I 18 18 15 60 93 23.25

C308.2 II 16 16 15 30 61 15.25

C308.3 III 16 16 15 30 61 15.25

C308.4 IV 16 16 15 30 61 15.25

C308.5 V 16 16 15 30 61 15.25

C308.6 VI 18 18 15 30 63 15.75

Total 50 50 15 15 15 15 15 15 120 30 30 30 400 100

IT= Internal Test OT=Objective Test

IQAC-JSCOE Page 28
7.2 Overall process to measure CO attainment

 Attainment of COs can be measured directly and indirectly

 Direct attainment of COs can be determined from the performances of students
in all the relevant assessment.
 Indirect attainment of COs can be determined from the course exit survey.
 The exit survey form should permit receiving feedback from students on all the
COs.
 Computation of indirect attainment of COs is based on the student refection.
Hence, the percentage weightage to indirect attainment kept at a low value, say
10%.

7.3 Stepwise CO attainment

7.3.1 Direct CO Attainment

Direct attainment of COs is determined from the performances of students in
Continuous Internal Evaluation (CIE) and University Exam(UE)
 The proportional weightages Internal assessment contributes 30% and
university assessment contributes 70%.
 Direct attainment of a specific COs is determined from the performances of
students to all the assessment items related to that particular CO. Hence, every
assessment item needs to be tagged with the relevant CO.
 Also, we need data about performance of students in all assessment.
.
7.3.2 Direct CO attainment from CIE

 Continuous Internal Evaluation (CIE) is conducted and evaluated by the

Department itself
 Course teacher has access to question-wise marks in all assessment in CIE.
 As all questions are tagged with relevant COs, the performances of students with
respect to each CO can be recorded.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 29
The process of CO attainment is articulated in figure

Fig 7.1 CO Attainment Flowchart

IQAC-JSCOE Page 30
 Table7.1 : Attainment of CO by Direct-Internal Assessment Method

Course:- Design Of Machine Elements-II (DME-II) (C308) [Semester-II AY 2018-19]

C308.1 Attainment

Overall Score Of The Student Over Scale Of '3', (D) = 0.6 X (A) + 0.3 X (B) + 0.1 X (C) & % Score Of The Student,
(E) = (D)/3 X 100
Direct Non-
Direct-Graded CES Attainment
Graded
(Assessed

Student's Percent Score Cross

By
Total Score Of

Total Direct- Graded Marks

Max Marks 18 15 33 Performa
Percentage Direct-Graded

Graded Marks (Scale Of 3)

The Student

Converted To Scale Of '3'

nce
Marks Obtained By The

Average Of Direct Non-

The Threshold* Value

Rubrics)

Course End Survey

Student Activity

% Score Of The
Over The Scale
Total Marks
Obtained

Experiment
Lab-Work /
Name Of The MT OT
Student (Q1) Q1
Student

Student
Of '3'
(%)

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E)

Angawane Pranil
4 11 15 45% 1.36 1.60 Na 1.60 3.00 1.60 53.27 No
Sunil

Bambal Pratik Anil 12 12 24 73% 2.18 2.20 Na 2.20 3.00 2.27 75.64 Yes

Bhamre Sumit
14 10 24 73% 2.18 2.20 Na 2.20 3.00 2.27 75.64 Yes
Bhaskar

: : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : :

Wedhane Jayesh
14 4 18 55% 1.64 2.40 Na 2.40 3.00 2.00 66.73 Yes
Nandkumar
Yadav Aniket
00 00 00 00% 0.00 1.00 Na 1.00 0.00 0.30 10.00 No
Pradeep
Zende Sourabh
14 8 22 67% 2.00 2.20 Na 2.20 3.00 2.16 72.00 Yes
Dipak

MT= Midterm test, OT= Online Test, AS= Assignment, PR=Practical (Lab experiment)
CES=Course end survey

IQAC-JSCOE Page 31
7.3.4 Attainment of all Cos

COURSE
Percentage Attainment
OUTCOMES

C308.1 54.79
2
C308.2 49.32
1
C308.3 53.42
2
C308.4 57.53
2
C308.5 45.21
1
C308.6 50.68
2
51.83 1.67
Average

7.3.5 Direct CO attainment from University exam

 External exam is conducted and evaluated by the University, so Departments get

only total marks scored in exam.
 Departments have no access of individual CO performance. So average marks in
university exam is considered as common attainment for all Cos.

Course Attainment by Direct [External] Assessment Process

Percentage attainment of the course will be calculated as,

(Number of Students Securing ≥ 50%)

% attainment = ---------------------------------------------------------- * 100
(Total number of students appearing for exam)

IQAC-JSCOE Page 32
 SEM V

C308 DME-II [302048] TE MECH SEM-II AY 2018-19 Student’s

Name of % Marks
Roll No Percentage Cross the
Student
Total Marks (Out marks of the Threshol
Insem Exam Theory Exam Oral Exam
of 125) student d*
(YES /
Marks Maximu Marks Maximum Marks Maximum Marks Maximum NO)
Obtained m Marks Obtained Marks Obtained Marks Obtained Marks
BAMBAL
3101 PRATIK 28 30 56 70 22 25 106 125 84.80 YES
ANIL
BHAMRE
3102 SUMIT 15 30 46 70 20 25 81 125 64.80 YES
BHASKAR
BHONG
3103 MONALI 22 30 29 70 18 25 69 125 55.20 YES
ASHOK
: : : : : : : : : : : :
DURGADE
3372 OMKAR 1 30 28 70 AA 25 29 125 23.20 NO
DADA
KANADE
3373 GAURAV 10 30 21 70 AA 25 31 125 24.80 NO
RAJENDRA
SALAKE
3374 RAVIRAJ 18 30 42 70 13 25 73 125 58.40 YES
JALINDAR
BHOSALE
3375 SATYJIT 0 30 AA 70 AA 25 0 125 0.00 NO
SURESH
SHELKE
3376 AJINKYA 12 30 45 70 3 25 60 125 48.00 NO
ANAND

Total number of YES Y=134

N= 172
Total number of students

% Attainment 77.90
= (134/172)*100

Total marks as scored by each student for each course is calculated. Then
percentage marks as scored by each student for a particular course is calculated
and the students securing more than 50%* mark for that course (subject) are
assumed to have attained that course (YES). The number of “YES” i.e. the number of

IQAC-JSCOE Page 33
students attained the course is counted and total number of students appearing for
that exam is also counted and based on these two values, percentage attainment for
that particular course(subject) is calculated. This percentage is treated as the
attainment by direct-external assessment process. The same is depicted in table
(50% is assumed as threshold value of direct-external assessment for each
course/subject)

Co SPPU
COURSE Total Attainment
YEAR COURSE Attainment Attainment
OUTCOMES Attainment Level
(Internal) (External)
C308.1 54.79 66.345
77.90 3
C308.2 49.32 77.90 63.61
TE DME-II 3
C308.3 53.42 77.90 65.66
3
C308.4 57.53 77.90 67.715
3
C308.5 45.21 77.90 61.555
3
C308.6 50.68 77.90 64.29
3
AVERAGE 51.82 77.90 64.86
3

7.3.6 Direct Attainment Computation of CO

(Weighted summation of direct-internal and direct-external percentage for

calculating overall attainment percentage)

Once direct-internal and direct-external percentage attainment is known for all the
courses of a particular semester of a particular academic year, assigning 30%
weightage for direct-internal and 70% weightage for direct-external attainment
percentage a weighted sum is calculated as overall percentage attainment for a
particular course.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 34
Overall direct attainment of a course/subject = 30% of Direct Internal Percentage
Attainment + 70% of Direct External Percentage Attainment

Internal External

Weightage 30% Weightage 70% Total

Attainment=
COURSE COURSE Students (0.3*internal Attainment
YEAR
NAME CODE Actual % of scored more attainment)+ level
internal CO Weight than average Weight (0.7*external
Attainment marks in attainment)
SPPU exam

DME-
TE XYZ 51.82 0.3 77.90 0.7 70.07 3
II

7.3.7 Total CO Attainment:

Computation of Attainment of CO = 0.9 * Direct CO Attainment + 0.1 * Indirect CO

Attainment.

Indirect CO
Direct CO Total CO
CO Attainment
Attainment % attainment
(Obtained from
CO1 66.35 Exit90.00
Survey) 78.17
CO2 63.61 85.00 74.31
CO 3 65.66 87.00 76.33
CO 4 67.72 90.00 78.86
CO 5 61.56 85.00 73.28
CO 6 64.29 89.00 76.65

If set target is not attained, then improvements must be planned to bridge the gap next
time. In case, target attained or exceeded, attainment target may be enhanced next time.
7.4 Action Plans for Improving the CO Attainments

 Action plans need to be as specific as possible.

 Indicate if any additional resources (Physical resources, Learning resources) are
required to implement the improvement plans.
IQAC-JSCOE Page 35
  Indicate if any changes in the Lesson Plan are required.
 Avoid vague statements like “Motivate the students”, “Work harder”.
 If possible, have the action plans reviewed by peers.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 36
 8. PO and PSO attainment
8.1 POs and PSOs:

A. POs and PSOs are/can be addressed through:

 Core courses

 Projects (Major and Mini)

 Seminars / Presentations

 Internships

 Co-curricular and Extra-Curricular Activities

 For any activity to be considered for computing the attainment of POs/PSOs,

all students of a program are required to participate in that activity.

 For activities to be included for computing attainment, the related student

performances should be measurable.

B. Strength of CO-PO/PSO Mapping

Attainment of a PO/PSO depends both on the attainment levels of associated COs

and the strengths to which it is mapped

8.2 List of PO, PSO assessment tools and processes

Broadly the data collection to measure the attainment of POs and PSOs is done
through direct and indirect methods. The list of assessment tools is as stated in
table

a. PO Assessment tools based on learning domain

IQAC-JSCOE Page 37
 Table 8.1 PO Assessment tools based on learning domain

Learning Domain POs Tool Data Collection theme

Knowledge PO1 i) Test/Assignment Each question is mapped with

CO,PO,BL & analysis of matrix
ii) SPPU Exam
obtained against set target

Problem Solving PO2,3,4,5 i)Assignment A rubric is designed with

Skill performance indicators &
ii)Mini/Major Project
analysis of rubric score
Lab Assessment obtained against set target.

iv) Co-Curricular
activities

Supportive skill PO9,10,11 i)Lab Assessments A rubric is

designed with
ii)Project
performance
iii) Co-curricular indicators &
analysis of rubric
activities
score obtained
against set target

Attitude PO6,7,8,12 i)Lab Assessments A rubric is designed with

performance indicators &
ii) Project
analysis of rubric score
iii) Co-curricular obtained against set target
activities

IQAC-JSCOE Page 38
 8.3 Relevancy of Assessment tools detail:
Table 8.2 Relevancy of Assessment tools

Tool Frequency Type PO/PSO Data Collected

Test After Direct PO 1-3

completion of
(Internal) PSO 1-3
each unit

Assignment After Direct PO 1-5

completion of
(Internal) PSO 1-3
each unit

Lab After Direct PO 4-10 Actual CO

Assessment(Internal) completion of Attainment of each

PSO 1-3 course based on
each practical
percentage of
Project 4 reviews per Direct PO 1-12 students scoring
Assessment(Internal) semester the set targets.
PSO 1-3

Student Once based Direct PO 1-12

Activity(Internal) on course
PSO 1-3
requirement

SPPU At the end of Direct PO 1-5,9,10

Exam(External) each semester
PSO 1-3

Exit Survey At the time of Indirect All PO/PSO Indirect attainment

Graduation level of each
PO/PSO based on
Employer feedback Once every Indirect All PO/PSO
survey/feedback
year
analysis.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 39
 8.3 Process for Attainm

ent of PO and PSO Fig 8.1 Process For Attainment Of PO and PSO

IQAC-JSCOE Page 40
 1.Mapping of CO with PO and PSO

COURSE

COURSE/ OUTCOME PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 PO7 PO8 PO9 PO10 PO11 PO12 PSO1 PSO2 PSO3
CLASS
SUBJECT S

M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M

2 1 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 0
CO1

CO2 3 2 2 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0

CO3 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 2 1 0 0
TE XYZ
CO4 3 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 2 0 2 1 0 0

CO5 2 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0

2 2 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
CO6

2. Average mapping calculation

PO PO PO1 PO1 PO1 PSO PSO PSO

COURSE/ PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 PO9
CLASS 7 8 0 1 2 1 2 3
SUBJECT
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M

AVG 2.33 1.67 1.67 1.00 1.00 1.33 - - 1.20 1.40 - 1.50 1.00 - -
TE

3. Total CO Attainment

CO Total CO attainment
CO1 66.345
CO2 63.61
CO 3 65.66
CO 4 67.715
CO 5 61.555
CO6 64.29

IQAC-JSCOE Page 41
4. PO/PSO Attainment

 Attainment of PO/PSO = (Average of attainments of relevant COs) x Scale Factor

 Scale Factor = (Actual Mapping Strength / Maximum Possible Mapping Strength)
= Actual Mapping Strength / 3
PO COs Mapping PO/PSO
Strength Attainment

PO1 CO1,CO2,CO3,CO4,CO5,CO6 2.33 50.37654

PO2 CO1,CO2,CO3,CO4,CO5,CO6 1.67 36.10679

PO3 CO1,CO2,CO3,CO4,CO5,CO6 1.67 36.10679

PO4 CO4 1.00 22.57167

PO5 CO4, CO6 1.00 22.00083

PO6 CO1,CO2,CO3,CO4,CO5,CO6 1.33 28.75571

PO9 CO1,CO2,CO3,CO4,CO5 1.20 25.9908

PO10 CO1,CO2,CO3,CO4,CO5 1.40 30.3226

PO12 CO1,CO2,CO3,CO4,CO5,CO6 1.50 32.43125

PSO1 CO1,CO2,CO3,CO4,CO5,CO6 1.00 21.62083

8.4 Total Attainment of a PO / PSO

 Combine the Direct Attainment with the Indirect Attainment using suitable
weights. Typical values are 0.8 and 0.2.
 Determine the Indirect Attainment based on all the relevant Surveys. (Graduate
Exit Survey, Alumni Survey, Employer Survey)
 To calculate final PO and PSO attainment all courses attainment is recorded
and average of each PO attainment is calculated.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 42
 Total Attainment =0.8 * Direct Attainment + 0.2 * Indirect Attainment

Sr. Subject Subject

PO1 PO2 PO3 …. PO8 PO9 PO10 PO11 PO12 PSO1 PSO2 PSO3
No. Code Name
1 C101 EM-I 1.00 … 1.00
11 C111 FPL-I 1.00 1.00 … 1.00
23 C211 AT 2.00 2.00 2.00 … 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00
27 C302 HT 2.00 2.00 1.00 … 1.67 1.83 1.83 1.00 1.83 2.00
32 C307 NMO 3.00 3.00 3.00 … 1.40 2.00 3.00 2.00

33 C308 DME-II 2.00 1.83 1.50 … 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00

Average Direct … …
1.66 1.62 1.57 1.19 1.62 1.06 1.40 1.51 1.59 1.64
Attainment
80% of Average Direct … …
1.33 1.29 1.25 0.95 1.30 0.85 1.12 1.21 1.27 1.31
Attainment

Indirect Attainment 2.39 2.25 2.33 … 2.65 … 2.57 2.44 2.11 2.20 2.25 2.08

20% of Indirect …
0.48 0.45 0.47 0.53 0.55 0.51 0.49 0.42 0.44 0.45 0.42
Attainment
Ovarall attainment of …
1.81 1.75 1.72 1.48 1.81 1.81 1.34 1.54 1.65 1.72 1.73
PO/PSO

8.5 Closing the Quality Loop at the Program Level

For each PO and PSO:
 Attainment target is set by PAC, The attainment evaluation is performed by
PAC
 Total attainment value for each PO and PSO is computed and checked it against
target.
 The areas of weaknesses are identified in the program based on the analysis
of evaluation of POs & PSOs attainment levels. Measures identified and
implemented to improve POs & PSOs attainment levels for the next
assessment years.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 43
 Definitions

Lectures The traditional class where the teacher speaks; students listen and take
notes. These days lectures can be very interactive, allowing students to ask
questions, providing time for students to discuss ideas with each other and so on. It
is good practice to alternate delivery of content with more active student
participation every 20 minutes or so.

Tutorials A smaller class (usually no more than 20 students) which provides an

opportunity for discussion and feedback. The tutor will normally ask questions to
check that students have understood the material and to encourage debate.
Students may also be required to use this time to work in groups on set tasks and
then feedback to the whole class.

Seminars Similar to a tutorial. A smaller class (usually no more than 20

students) built around discussion and exploration of the module content. Sometimes
students will be asked to prepare a short paper or presentation.

Laboratory Sessions in which students are guided to undertake practical

experiments

Practicals /workshops These are sessions in which students practice their

practical / skills

IT workshops These take place in a classroom with computers and are dedicated
to teaching students how to use the software they need. They may also be used to
engage students with electronic resources that help them learn more about their
subject, such as through simulations, online quizzes and so on.

Directed reading This is where students are set tasks and asked to read material
in between classes, in their own time.

Self-directed learning This refers to time that students study either by

themselves, in pairs or in groups. They will usually be set a task, but they will need
their own initiative to give shape to the task, for example by selecting and assessing
journal articles, or by profiling contemporary or topical issues in their field.

Problem-based learning A method of teaching whereby students are set a

problem and work in groups to research and solve it.

IQAC-JSCOE Page 44
 References

1. Allen, M.J. (2004). Assessing Academic Programs in Higher Education. Bolton,

MA: Anker Publishing.
2. Anderson, L.W. & Karthwohl, D. R. (2001) A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching,
and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New
York: Longman.
3. Angelo, T.A & Cross, K.P. (1993). Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook
for College Teachers, 2nd Ed.,San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
4. Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of
Educational Goals. Handbook I:Cognitive Domain. White Plains, N.Y.: Longman.
5. Guidelines for Assessment. (1993, Spring). Retrieved on July 9, 2017 from
California State University, Chico website: http://www.csuchico.edu
/community/ assessment.html
6. www.nbaind.org
7. http://www.learningoutcomesassessment.org/

IQAC-JSCOE Page 45