NBA Handbook Tier 1

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY
NBA HANDBOOK – Tier 1
2018-19
Prepared By
Dr Narayana Swamy Ramaiah

Professor, Jain Deemed To Be University
Bangalore
NBA ACCREDITATION
National Board of Accreditation (NBA)

 Established in the year 1994 under Section 10 (u) of AICTE Act
 NBA became Autonomous in January 2010 and in April 2013 the Memorandum of Association
and Rules of NBA were amended to make it completely independent of AICTE, administratively
as well as financially
 NBA does not receive any grant either from the Government or from any other regulatory body of
technical and higher education
Mission of NBA
“To stimulate the quality of teaching, self-evaluation and accountability in higher education and
facilitate the Institutions in realizing their academic objectives, adopt teaching practices that enable
them to produce high quality professionals and to assist them in continuously contributing to the
domain of knowledge through innovations & research”.
Accreditation
 Accreditation is a process of quality assurance and improvement, whereby a program in an
approved Institution is critically appraised to verify that the Institution or the program continues
to meet and/or exceed the Norms and Standards prescribed by regulator from time to time.
 It is a kind of recognition which indicates that a programme or Institution fulfils certain standards.
 Accreditation is given for a maximum period of five years.
 Programs, and not Educational Institutions, are considered for accreditation.
 Programs to be accredited should be offered by an educational Institution which has been formally
approved as an educational Institution by the concerned regulatory authority. (AICTE).
 Programs from which at least two batches of students have graduated will be considered for
accreditation.
 Programs are considered for assessment and accreditation only at the written request of the
educational institution and after agreeing to abide by the NBA’s accreditation manual, rules,
regulations and notifications issued from time to time.
1
NBA Accreditation
 Actual performance based on inputs and outputs
 Assessment of Performance
 Availability and quality of human resources
 Based on self-assessment questionnaires and a SWOT analysis
 Qualitative assessment
 Depends on Quality Systems
 Detail Self-assessment report submitted to NBA
Accreditation serves to notify

 Parents and prospective students that a program has met minimum standards
 Faculty, HOD, Principal of a program’s strengths and weaknesses and of ways to improve the
programme
 Employers that graduates are prepared to begin professional practice
 The public that graduates are aware of societal considerations
Purpose of accreditation is NOT TO

 find faults with the institution but to assess the status-ante of the performance
 denigrate the working style of the institution and its programs but to provide a feed
 back on their strengths and weaknesses
 demarcate the boundaries of quality but to offer a sensitizing process for continuous
 improvement in quality provisions
 select only institutions of national excellence but to provide benchmarks of excellence and
identification of good practices
Benefits of Accreditation
 Facilitates continuous Quality Improvement
 Promotes intra and inter-Institutional interactions
 Demonstrates accountability to the public
 Improves staff morale
 Recognizes the achievements/innovations

 Facilitates information sharing
 Priority in getting financial assistance Helps the Institution to know its strengths, weaknesses and
opportunities
 Initiates Institutions into innovative and modern methods of pedagogy
Pre 2013 Scenario
 Educational quality measurements focused on inputs, activities and outputs, such as resources used,
classes taught, articles published, placements and graduate enrolments.
 Such performance indicators provide no measurement of the degree to which Institutions of higher
learning actually develop the knowledge and skills of their students.
 These measurements are ill-suited to inform governments, students and the general public about teaching
and learning quality.
 In the absence of comparable learning outcomes assessment across institutions, ratings and rankings are
widely used as proxies for relative educational quality.
 NBA criteria were mainly input-process-output related and there were no direct measures of quality of
learning.
Washington Accord
 It recognizes the substantial equivalency of programs accredited by those bodies and recommends that
graduates of programs accredited by any of the signatory bodies be recognized by the other bodies as
having met the academic requirements for entry to the practice of engineering
Post 2013 Scenario

 India became a signatory to the Washington Accord
 This requires the Outcomes of engineering programs should be identified in the spirit of Graduate
Attributes annunciated by Washington Accord
Present System of Engineering Education

 Curriculum is a collection of courses as decided by AICTE
 Each course is defined by a list of topics selected from identified textbook(s)
 Students learn as per their understanding of final examinations, which have their own
independent dynamics
 A very significant percentage of questions in final examinations today belong to the category of
remembering information
What are Outcomes?

 An outcome of an education is what the student should be able to do at the end of a program/ course/
instructional unit
 Outcome-based education is an approach to education in which decisions about the curriculum are driven
by the exit learning outcomes that the students should display at the end of the program/ course
 Outcomes are the abilities the students acquire at the end of the program
 In outcome-based education, “product defines process”.
 It is the results-oriented thinking and is the opposite of input-based education where the emphasis is on
the educational process and where we are happy to accept whatever is the result”
 Outcome-based education is not simply producing outcomes for an existing curriculum.
Levels of Outcomes
 Program Educational Objectives: PEOs are broad statements that describe the career and professional
accomplishments in five years after graduation that the program is preparing graduates to achieve
 Program Specific Outcomes: PSOs are statements that describe what the graduates of a specific
engineering program should be able to do
 Program Outcomes: POs are statements that describe what the students graduating from engineering
programs should be able to do
 Course Outcomes: COs are statements that describe what students should be able to do at the end of a
course
What is SAR (Self-Assessment Report?)

 SAR is compilation of such data and information pertaining to a given program for its
assessment (identifying strength and weaknesses) vis-à-vis accomplishment of defined POs and
PSOs by the college itself. 
 SAR has two parts
Part - A Seeks Institutional /Departmental information
Part - B Seeks Information on Ten Criteria
Criteria
Vision & Mission of the Department
Program Educational Objectives
POs and PSOs

Course Outcomes
CO Attainment
PO Attainment
Vision, Mission, PEOs, POs, PSOs
Vision and Mission

 Vision: Where you “see” your department down the road; typically one sentence!
 Mission: What you “do” to get there? Typically, 2-3 sentences.
• Must follow from Vision and Mission of the Institute
• Must be shared with all stake holders!
• Better to avoid “flowery” phrases(generally):
– World-Class
– Global excellence
– All round excellence …
• Must result from a well-defined and recorded process!
Vision and Mission – Validation process

 Stakeholders: Top Management (...), Faculty and Staff, Current Students,
 Alumni, Employers, Industry representatives
 Process:
o Initial brainstorming at multiple levels;
o Review, refine, validate (Experts, Advisory Group,...)
o Wide publicity (Institute web site, campus,)
o Review “to close the loop” (5 years?)
o (Regular interactions with new faculty and staff; students?)
 Process documentation
 Records of process implementation
8
PEOs
 What the Graduates of the program are expected to achieve within 4 to 5 years of completing the
program.
 Can be abstract to some extent; but must be smaller in number and must be achievable.
 Must follow from Vision and Mission
 Must follow an established process
 Typically, the process is similar to the one for Vision and Mission
 Process Documentation
 Records of Process Implementation
 Must be shared with all stake holders!
 Key elements (generally):
o Professional success
o Life-long learning, Higher Education, Research
o Ethical professional practice
o Communication skills
o Team player
 3 to 5 PEOs may be arrived at following a well-defined and recorded process
 Measurement and closing the loop
(Sample) PEOs
Example: 1 Graduates of EEE engineering will be able to
 Engage in design of systems, tools and applications in the field of electrical and electronics
engineering and allied engineering industries
 Apply the knowledge of electrical and electronics engineering to solve problems of social
relevance, and/or pursue higher education
 Work effectively as individuals and as team members in multidisciplinary projects
 Engage in lifelong learning, career enhancement and adopt to changing professional and
societal needs
Example: 2 Graduates of Mechanical engineering will be able to

 To prepare students for successful careers in industry to meet the needs of Indian and Global
companies. or to become entrepreneur
 To provide opportunity for students to work in their individual capacity as well as to function as
teams on multidisciplinary projects.
 To enable students for lifelong learning and introduce them to professional ethics and
sustainable development.
 Identify and engage in query, develop new innovations and products
9
Mission – PEO Mapping
 PEOs must be consistent with the Mission:
Example: PEO state that the Graduates will be successful in Research BUT Mission has no
mention of Research!
 Develop the PEO-Mission Matrix, The strength of mapping between a PEO and an element
of Mission may be marked as Substantial, Moderate, Low, Such mapping strengths must be
justified
 From this perspective also, it is better to limit the number of PEOs to a reasonably small number
and have fairly crisp Mission statements.
PEO MISSION-1 MISSION-2 MISSION-3 MISSION- N
PEO 1 3 2 3
PEO 2 2 - 1
PEO n 1 1 1
 M1, M2, and so on are elements of the Mission

 Correlation levels: 1, 2, or 3 interpreted as follows:
1- Low; 2- Moderate; 3 – Substantial. If there is no correlation, indicate by a “–”
 Each mapping needs to be justified
 Example:
 A PEO states that the Graduates will engage in life-long learning; this is mapped to
an Element of the Mission statement, “environment conducive for self-directed
learning”; PEO3–M4: The mapping strength is “substantial”
 Justification: The learning environment provided in the college is designed to promote
self-directed learning by the students; this coupled with the Program Curriculum will
lead Graduates to engage in continuous learning in their professional careers. POs and
PSOs
 What the students become capable of, at the end of the program (PEOs look at the Graduates
4 years after the completion of the program!)
 POs (12 in number) are defined by NBA; are applicable to all g r a d ua te programs;
cover not just technology competence but also skills and attitudes!
 PSOs are program specific; 2 to 4; need to be defined following a documented process
10
POs defined by NBA
1. Engineering knowledge: Apply the knowledge of mathematics, science, engineering, fundamentals, and an
engineering specialization to the solution of complex engineering problems.
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.
3. Design/development of solutions: Design solutions for complex engineering problems and design system
components or processes that meet t h e specified needs with appropriate consideration for the public health and
safety, and the cultural, societal, and environmental considerations.
4. Conduct investigations of complex problems: The problems that cannot be solved by straightforward application
of knowledge, theories and techniques applicable to the engineering discipline. *that may not have a unique
solution. For example, a design problem can be solved in many ways and lead to multiple possible solutions. that
require consideration of appropriate constraints/requirements not explicitly given in the problem statement. (like:
cost, power requirement, durability, product life, etc.). which need to be defined (modeled) within appropriate
mathematical framework. that often require use of modern computational concepts and tools.# *(Different from
most problems at the end of chapters in a typical text book that allow more or less simple and direct approach
Since this explains what is meant in more detail, could be put into training or supplementary material). # (For
example, in the design of an antenna or a DSP filter Examples could be put into supplementary notes.)
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.
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.
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.
8. Ethics: Apply ethical principles and commit to professional ethics and responsibilities and norms of the
engineering practice.
9. Individual and team work: Function effectively as an individual, and as a member or leader in diverse teams,
and in multidisciplinary settings.
10. Communication: Communicate effectively 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.
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.
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.
11
Sample POs: Graduates of Mechanical Engineering is
1. An ability to apply knowledge of basic mathematics, science and engineering to solve the broadly defined
Mechanical engineering problems.( Basic knowledge)
2. An ability to apply discipline - specific knowledge to solve broadly defined Mechanical engineering
problems.(Discipline knowledge)
3. An ability to conduct standard tests and measurements, and to conduct, analyze, and interpret experiments
(Experiments and practice)
4. An ability to apply the knowledge, techniques, skills, and modern tools of their discipline to narrowly-
defined engineering technology activities.(Engineering Tools)
5. Demonstrate knowledge to assess societal, health, safety, legal and cultural issues and the consequent
responsibilities relevant to engineering practice(The engineer and society )
6. Understand the impact of the engineering solutions in societal and environmental contexts, and demonstrate the
knowledge and need for sustainable development.( Environment and sustainability)
7. Apply ethical principles and commit to professional ethics and responsibilities and norms of the engineering
practice. (Ethics)
8. Function effectively as an individual, and as a member or leader in diverse/multidisciplinary teams.(
Individual and team work)
9. An ability to apply written, oral, and graphical communication in both technical and nontechnical environments
and the ability to use appropriate technical literature (Communication)
10. Recognize the need for, and have the preparation and ability to engage in independent and life-long
learning in the context of technological changes (Life-long learning)
Program Specific Outcomes (PSOs):

 Beyond POs
 Specific to the particular program
 2 to 4 in number
 Must have a process for arriving at them
 Must be realistic
 Program Curriculum and other activities during the program must help the achievement
of PSOs as with POs!
12
 PSOs – Examples
 CSE: (Stem as with POs)
– Develop, test, and maintain Software Systems for business applications
– Develop, test, and maintain Systems Software.
– Maintain legacy software systems
 ECE: (Stem as with POs)

– Test modern electronic systems that perform analog and digital signal processing
functions.
– Select appropriate technologies for implementation of a specified communication
system
 ME: (stem as with Pos)

– The program must demonstrate that diplomats can apply specific program principles to
Design, fabrication, test, operation, or documentation of basic mechanical systems or
processes
– The program make diplomats design , develop, test society needed products and
engage in manufacturing or processing such quality products with utmost environment
safety and committed for sales of products and provide good service to customer
PSOS – EXERCISES
Closing the Quality Loop

– All the processes required for accreditation need to have the step of “closing the loop”.
– A model useful for understanding this is the Deming’s Quality Cycle:
Plan:
We plan the activity; do it; measure the performance (CHECK); and finally based on what was
planned and what was actually achieved, initiate appropriate action commencing the next round of
the quality cycle.
13
Action:
 If the attainment lags behind the planned target, we need to further analyze the reasons for the
same and plan suitable corrective actions for the next round.
 If the achievement exceeds the planned target, we need to “raise the bar”! Further, we need to
examine:
– If the targets set were too easy; if so, we need to raise the bar in a realistic fashion
– If the targets set were reasonable, then we need to plan for achieving the new target level.
– This concept of Quality Loop operates at all levels of attainment of outcomes. Will be
discussed elaborately in later sessions
At Course Level:
 Target levels of attainment of Course Outcomes (COs) are set; Course is delivered; actual
attainment of COs is determined;
AND
 The loop is closed either by increasing the target level for the next offering of the course or
 By planning suitable improvements in the teaching /learning process to increase the actual attainment
so as to reach the target
At PO, PSO Level:

 POs and PSOs are achieved through formal courses and other co-curricular and extra-curricular
activities
 Target levels of attainment of POs and PSOs are set; Program is delivered; actual attainment of POs
and PSOs is determined; The loop is closed either by increasing the target level for the next cycle of
the program or By planning suitable improvements in all the relevant activities to increase the actual
attainment
 “Closing the loop” must be carried out, in a similar manner, at the level of PEOs also!
 This concept applies even at higher levels of Mission and Vision though the time frames involved are
usually much larger!
– Thus Mission is revisited typically once in 5 to 6 years.
– It is much rarer to revisit the Vision in less than about 7 to 10 years!
– This process view of Quality is implicitly central to Accreditation
14
Taxonomy of Teaching, Learning and Assessment
Dimensions of Learning
 Cognitive
– Cognitive Processes
 Knowledge Categories
– Affective (Emotion)
 Psychomotor
15
Anderson/Bloom’s Taxonomy
 Knowledge/Remember
 Understand
 Apply
 Analyze
 Evaluate
 Create
1. Knowledge/Remember
 Remembering involves retrieving relevant knowledge from long-term memory The relevant
knowledge may be factual, conceptual, procedural, or some combination of these
 Remembering knowledge is essential for meaningful learning and problem solving as that
knowledge is used in more complex tasks
 Action verbs: Recognize, recall, list, mention, state, draw, label, define, name, describe, prove a
theorem etc.
2. Understand
 We are said to understand when we are able to construct meaning from instructional
messages
 Instructional messages can be verbal, pictorial/ graphic or symbolic
 Instructional messages are received during lectures, demonstrations, field trips, performances, or
simulations, in books or on computer monitors
 Action verbs for ‘Understanding’
– Interpret: translate, paraphrase, represent and clarify
– Exemplify: Illustrate and instantiate
– Classify: Categorize and subsume
– Summarize: Generalize and abstract
– Infer: Find a pattern
– Compare: Contrast, match, and map
– Explain: Construct a model Using procedures to perform exercises or solve problems closely
linked with procedural knowledge
3. Apply
Action verbs: Execute/Implement: determine, calculate, compute, estimate, solve, draw, relate, modify, etc.
4. Analyze
 Involves breaking material into its constituent parts and determining how the parts are
related to one another and to an overall structure
16
 Differentiate: Discriminate, differentiate, focus and select (Distinguishing relevant parts
or important parts from unimportant parts of presented material)
 Organize: Structure, integrate, find coherence, outline, and parse (Determine how elements
fit or function within a structure)
 Attribute: Deconstruct (Determine a point of view, bias, values, or intent underlying
presented material
 Analysis in Graduate programs
 Use of the verb ‘analyze’ is bit tricky, It is not easy to design any questions in this category in
limited time written examinations
 Analyze activities can be included in assignments related to case studies, projects, term
papers and field studies
5. Evaluate
 Make judgments based on criteria and standards
 Criteria used include quality, effectiveness, efficiency and consistency
 The standards may be either quantitative or qualitative
 Evaluate: Action Verbs
 Check: Test, detect, monitor, coordinate
 Critique: Judge (Accuracy, adequacy, appropriateness, clarity, cohesiveness, completeness,
consistency, correctness, credibility, organization, reasonableness, reasoning, relationships,
reliability, significance, standards, usefulness, validity, values, worth, criteria, standards, and
procedures)
6. Create
 Involves putting elements together to form a coherent or functional whole
 While it includes objectives that call for unique production, also refers to objectives calling
for production that students can and will do
 Action verbs:
o Generate: Classify systems, concepts, models, explanations,
generalizations, hypotheses, predictions, principles, problems, questions,
stories, theories)
 Plan (design)
 Produce
Affective Domain
 Difficult to structure
17
 Catch all: self-concept, motivation, interests, attitudes, beliefs, values, self- esteem, morality,
ego development, feelings, need achievement, locus of control, curiosity, creativity,
independence, mental health, personal growth, group dynamics, mental imagery and
personality
Psychomotor domain
 It includes physical movement, coordination, and use of the motor-skill areas.
 Development of these skills requires practice and is measured in terms of speed,
precision, distance, procedures, or techniques in execution.
Relation between the three domains

 Cognitive, affective and psychomotor activities are not independent of one another
 Instruction needs to pay attention to these dependencies
Attainment of Course Outcomes

Outcomes of Learning
 Outcomes of any learning: Outcomes, Course Outcomes, Learning Outcomes, Intended
Learning Outcomes, Instructional Objectives, Educational Objectives, Behavioral Objectives,
Performance Objectives, Terminal Objectives, Subordinate Skills, Subordinate Objectives,
General Instructional Objectives, Specific Learning Outcomes and Competencies.
Structure of a CO Statement
 Action: Represents a cognitive/ affective/ psychomotor activity the learner should perform. An
action is indicated by an action verb representing the concerned cognitive process.
 Knowledge: Represents the specific knowledge from any one or more of the eight knowledge
categories
 Conditions: represents the process the learner is expected to follow or the conditions 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)
Course Outcomes
 The number of course outcomes is about 6 for theory course, 4-credit course has about 60
classroom sessions
 The number of course outcomes is varying from 4 to 6 for practical/Work shop course, 3-
credit Practical course has about 78 sessions (26 tutorial sessions+52 Practical sessions)
 It is desirable to associate an approximate number of Units of teaching with each Course
Outcome.
18
Example: Sample Course Outcomes
o Course: Strength of materials Credits: 4:0:0
Course Outcome Cognitive Class Lab
Level Sessions Sessions
CO1 Understand and distinguish the behavior of U

simple load carrying members subjected to
an axial, shear and thermal Loading. 12
CO2 Interpret the Variation of moment of U
inertia for different Mechanical
Engineering Sections 10
CO3 Draw and Compare the shear force and App
bending moment diagram on beams under
varying load conditions 12
CO4 Assess Bending and shear stresses in Ap

beams subjected to different loadings for
different machine parts 8
Differentiate in strain energy stored in a
CO5 body when the load is suddenly applied Ap
and gradually applied 4
CO6 Design simple power transmission shaft Ap

for professional engineering solutions in
6
societal and environmental contexts
Total Hours of instruction 52
Attainment of COs of the Course

o Attainment of COs can be measured directly and indirectly
o Direct attainment of COs can be determined from the performances of students
in all the relevant assessment instruments.
o Indirect attainment of COs can be determined from the course exit surveys.
o The exit survey form should permit receiving feedback from students on individual
COs.
o Computation of indirect attainment of COs may turn out to be complex; the

percentage weightage to indirect attainment can be kept at a low percentage,
say 10%.
Direct CO attainment
o Semester End Examination (SEE) is conducted and evaluated by the SBTE
o The Department will have access only to the marks obtained by each
student in the course
o As the information on performance in SEE on each student in individual COs is
not available, the Institution/Department has to take that attainment
(percentage marks) for all COs of the course is the same.
o The proportional weightages of CIE: SEE may be 40:60, 25:75 or 30:70.
o The number of assessment instruments used for CIE is decided by the
instructor and/or Department and sometimes by the affiliating University
18
Assessment Pattern
Example: Sample Assessment Pattern for all the concerned CIE Instruments (assuming
40% weightage for CIE) indicated.
CL A1 T1 T2 T3
5 20 20 20
Remember 0 20% 20% 15%
Understand 0 60% 40% 40%
Apply 100% 20% 40% 45%
Analyze 0 0 0 0
Evaluate 0 0 0 0
Create 0 0 0 0
Class average in CIE
A1 T1 T2 T3 CIE Class
CO 5 20 20 20 Average
Cl.
Ave Cl. Ave Cl. Ave Cl. Ave
CO1 0 5.4/10 0 0 5.4/10= 54%
CO2 1.5/2 4.8/10 0 0 6.3/12 = 52.5%
CO3 0.7/1 0 7.4/10 0 8.1/11= 73.6%
CO4 1.7/2 0 3.8/10 2.9/5 8.4/17= 49.4%

2.9/5
CO5 0 0 0 2.9/5= 58%
7.4/10
CO6 0 0 0 7.4/10= 74%
Setting CO Attainment Targets

o There can be several methods, one which suited for the diploma program
Example :
o Same target is identified for all the COs of a course. For example: the target can be
“the class average marks > 60 marks”
Setting targets for Course Outcomes
o Targets are set for each CO of a course separately.
CO Target (Class Average)
CO1 60%
CO2 60%
CO3 60%
CO4 60%
CO5 60%
CO6 60%
19
o It does not directly indicate the distribution of performance among the students.
It has the advantage of finding out the difficulty of specific COs
o There are several ways setting targets for Course Outcomes
Computation of CO Direct Attainment in the course Strength of Materials
Attainment of CO in a course Strength of materials = Wt. of CIE x Attainment of CO as

percentage in CIE + Wt. of SEE x Class Average Marks Percentage in SEE ( You
have find out as 48Marks Class average in SEE)
CO CIE SEE Direct CO Attainment

25 100 0.40 CIE Cl. Ave
Cl. Ave Cl. Ave +0.60 SEE Cl. Ave
48% 50.4%
CO1 5.4/10= 54%
CO2 6.3/12 = 52.5% 48% 49.8%
CO3 8.1/11= 73.6% 48% 58.24%
CO4 8.4/17= 49.4% 48% 48.56%
CO5 2.9/5= 58% 48% 52%
CO6 7.4/10= 74% 48% 58.4%
CO Attainment and Attainment Gap

Computation of Attainment of COs in Strength of Materials
CO Direct CO CO CO Target CO
Attainment Attainment Attainment Gap
0.40 CIE Class Average %ge
+0.60 SEE Class Average
CO1 50.4% 50.4% 60% 9.6%
CO2 49.8% 49.8% 60% 10.2%
CO3 58.24% 58.24% 60% 1.76%
CO4 48.56% 48.56% 60% 11.44%
CO5 52% 52% 60% 8.00%
CO6 58.4% 58.4% 60% 1.6%
20
Closure of the Quality Loop
Target CO Action proposed to bridge Modification of

Attainment gap the gap target where
achieved
Suitable action to be initiated to fill the gap If the target
at the course co coordinator level and the achived,Higher target
CO1 60% 9.6% same has to be documented may be set
Suitable action to be initiated to fill the gap

at the course co coordinator level and the
Same as above
same has to be documented.
CO2 60% 10.2%
CO3 1.76% Same as above Same as above
60%

60%

60%

60%
COs-POs and PSOs

o POs and PSOs are attained through program specific Core Courses.
o Each Course addresses a sub-set of POs and PSOs to varying levels

(strengths) (1, 2 or 3). Sometimes we determine the POs/PSOs the
courses address.
o Sometimes we may appropriately determine the POs/ PSOs a Course
should address and the COs have to be written to meet the identified POs/PSOs.
Strength of CO-PO/PSO Mapping
o Attainment of a PO/PSO depends both on the attainment levels of

associated COs and the strength to which it is mapped
o It is necessary to determine the level (mapping strength) at which a

particular PO/PSO is addressed by the course.
 Strength of mapping is defined at three levels: Low (1), Medium (2) and Strong
(3)
 Several methods can be worked to determine the strength of a PO/PSO, but
Implementing them across a few hundred courses can become a burden
Strength of CO-PO/PSO Mapping Sample
 A simple method is to relate the level of PO with the number of hours devoted to
the COs which address the given PO.
 If >40% of classroom sessions addressing a particular PO, it is considered that
PO is addressed at Level 3
 If 25 to 40% of classroom sessions addressing a particular PO, it is considered
that PO is addressed at Level 2
 If 5 to 25% of classroom sessions addressing a particular PO, it is considered
21
that PO is addressed at Level 1
 If < 5% of classroom sessions addressing a particular PO, it is considered that
PO is considered not-addressed
Example: Sample CO-PO/PSO Mappings

o Course: Strength of materials Credits: 4:0:0
Lab
Class
Course Outcome POs CL Sessions
Sessions
(Hrs)
Understand and distinguish the behavior
of simple load carrying members PO1,
CO1 subjected to an axial, shear and thermal PO2,PO3 U 12
Loading. PSO1
Interpret the Variation of moment of

inertia for different Mechanical
PO1,
Engineering Sections
PO2,PO3
CO2 PSO1 U 10 -
Draw and Compare the shear force and

bending moment diagram on beams
CO3 under varying load conditions. PO1,Po2,Po3 App 12 -
PSO1
Assess Bending and shear stresses in

beams subjected to different loadings for
different machine parts PO1, PO2,
CO4 PO5, Ap 8 -
PSO1
Differentiate in strain energy stored in a

body when the load is suddenly applied PO1, PO2,
CO5 and gradually applied Ap 4 -
PO5, PSO1
Design simple power transmission shaft

PO2, PO5,
CO6 for professional engineering solutions in Ap 6 -
PO6, PSO1
societal and environmental contexts
Total Hours of instruction 52 -
Course – PO/PSO Mapping Strength

34 of 52 (65%) sessions are devoted to PO1 Mapping strength is 3

6 of 52 (11.53%) sessions are devoted to P6 Mapping strength is 1
52 of 52 (100%) Sessions are devoted to PSO1 Mapping strength is 3
22
Course-POs/PSO Mapping
o POs and PSOs are addressed through core courses, projects etc.
o A course/project etc. meets a subset of POs and PSOs to different strengths (1, 2 or 3)
Sample Course addresses a subset of POs and PSOs to varying strengths
Course PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 PO7 PO8 PO9 PO10 PSO1 PSO2
Strength of
3 3 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 0
material
CO Attainment and POs/PSOs

o Not every CO of the course will address every PO or PSO addressed by the course
CO POs CO Attainment
%ge
CO1 PO1,PO2,PO3,PSO1 50.4
CO2 PO1,PO2,PO3,PSO1 49.8
CO3 PO1,PO2,PO3 58.24

,PSO1
CO4 PO1,PO2, PO5, PSO1 48.50
CO5 PO1,PO2, PO5, PSO1 52
CO6 PO2, PO5,PO6, PSO1 58.40
PO and PSO Attainment
PO and PSO attainments are normalized to 1, that is, if a PO is to be addressed at the level of 3 and
attainments of CO associated with that PO is 100%,
PO1 Attainment in Strength of material course = (3/3)x Ave (0.504+0.498+0.5824+0.4850+0.520)= 0.51
PO2 Attainment in Strength of material course = (3/3)x Ave(0.504+0.498+0.5824+0.4850+0.520) = 0.51
PO3 Attainment in Strength of material course = (3/3)x Ave (0.504+0.498+0.5824)=0.52
PO5 Attainment in Strength of material course = (2/3) x Ave (0.48+0.52) = 0.33
PO6 Attainment in Strength of material course = (1/3) x Ave (0.5840) =0.19
PSO1 Attainment of in Strength of material course = (3/3) x Ave
(0.504+0.498+0.5824+0.4850+0.520+0.5840) = 0.528
oThese computations are approximate but indicative PO/PSO attainment

Attainment of POs and PSOs
Course PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 PO7 PO8 PO9 PO10 PSO1 PSO2
Strength
of 3 3 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 0
Materials
Attain- 0.51 0.51 0.52 0 0.33 0.19 0 0 0 0 0.528 0
ment
23
Use of Surveys
A Recap
o Evaluation of attainment of POs and PSOs is based on Direct and Indirect

Methods!
o Direct Methods:

The performance of students in different assessments (CIE, SBTE exams) Evaluation of

attainment of COs Evaluation of attainment of POs and PSOs based on the mappings
from COs to POs and PSOs
o Indirect Methods:
Program Exit Surveys, Alumni Surveys, and Employer Surveys are used to evaluate the
attainment of POs and PSOs
Attainment of POs and PSOs

o Evaluations of attainment of POs and PSOs based on Direct and Indirect Methods are
Combined to arrive at the Final Evaluation.
Example: PO4 (Engineering Tools): Evaluation Based on Direct Methods: Level 2
o Based on Indirect Methods (3 Surveys): 3.67
o Combined Evaluation:
(w1 x 2) + (w2 x 3.67)
o The weights w1 and w2 need to decided by the Institute.
Typical values can be 0.8 and 0.2 respectively!
o With these values, the combined value is: 1.6 + 0.73 = 2.33
(Between Level 2 and Level 3)
Attainment of PEOs
o Evaluation of attainment of PEOs is generally based only on Indirect Methods!
Indirect Methods:
Alumni Surveys, and Employer Surveys are generally used to evaluate the attainment of PEOs.
o Thus the data from Surveys is used for evaluating the attainment of POs and PSOs as
well as PEOs.
o The actual responses useful for these two different purposes are not identical!
The different surveys

1. Program Exit survey
Program Exit Survey -1
Personal Details:
o Name
o Duration at the Institute (From...To....)
o Program of Study
o Rural / Urban Background
o Placement Status
o Rank in DCET
24
(What follows are sample questions only)
On a scale of 1 (worst) to 5 (best) where relevant (other ranges are possible, of Course)
Program Exit Survey - 2

o Level of comfort in working in groups
o Level of confidence in formulating imprecise real-world problems as formal engineering

problems
o Opportunities provided for acquiring leadership skills
o Communication skills and Interpersonal skills acquired during your stay in the Institute
o Nature of final-year project: (Implementation, Fabrication, Purely theoretical,
...)
o Confidence in applying concepts of Mathematics and Computing in solving problems

o Usefulness of professional core courses during job interviews
o Availability and adequacy of modern tools in the laboratories
o Opportunities provided for working in multi-disciplinary project teams
o Usefulness of Mathematics, Professional core and electives in competitive exams

like DCET conducted by Karnataka examination Authority etc
o Level of understanding of the need to factor in sustainability, ethical, health,

public safety, and environmental issues in the solutions developed by you.
o Opportunities for working on real-life problems during the program
o Extent of opportunities available for applying management principles in academic

activities undertaken by you during the program
o Extent of usefulness of Basic Science and Engineering Science courses in problem solving

o New tools (outside the formal curriculum) learnt
o Extent of acquisition of critical analysis competency in solving broadly defined

problems
o Open suggestions for improving the quality of the program
25
2.Alumni Survey
Alumni Survey - 1
Personal Details:
o Name
o Duration at the Institute (From...To....)
o Program of Study
o Rural / Urban Background
o ....
o ... ...
Alumni Survey - 2
On a scale of 1 (worst) to 5 (best) where relevant (other ranges are possible!) (These are sample
questions only):
o Current Position; Organization
o Initial Position; Organization
o Promotions, Organizations in which you worked along with period in each organization,
Rewards, Awards, projects handled etc
o Publication of Research Papers, White Papers etc.
o Level of comfort in working in groups – initially and at present
Alumni Survey - 3
o Enhancement of qualifications (higher degrees, certificate courses etc), knowledge,

skills etc. (workshops, training programs etc)
o Level of confidence and success in formulating imprecise real-world problems as formal

engineering problems – initially, now
o Success in leadership roles (preparedness at program exit, success in on-site

trainings etc.)
o Communication skills (level of acquisition during the program, usefulness in the

job, additional acquisitions during work etc.)
Alumni Survey - 4
o Level of Interpersonal skills

o Ease with modern tools
o Learning curve with new tools

o New tools learnt during job
Alumni Survey - 5
o Your assessment of need for professional ethics in work
o Comfort level with application of concepts Mathematics, Engineering,… in solving real
Problems
o Usefulness of professional core courses in your professional practice.

o Relevance of professional electives to your profession so far
Alumni Survey - 6
o Ability to factor in sustainability, ethical, health, public safety, and environmental

issues in the solutions developed by you.
o Extent of application of project management principles in the projects handled/being

26
handled by you
o Extent of usefulness of Basic Science and Engineering Science courses in

understanding problems you solved so far in your career
Open suggestions for improving the quality of the Program
o
3. Employer Survey
Employer Survey - 1
Organization Details: ...
Employee Details:
o Name
o Current Position
o Date of Joining the Organization
o Position at the time of joining ... ...
Employer Survey - 2
With respect to our Graduates, please indicate Your assessment on the following:
o Ability to work well in groups
o Publication of technical Papers etc.
o Level of confidence and success in formulating imprecise real-world problems as
formal engineering problems
o Success in leadership roles
o Communication skills
Employer Survey - 3
o Interpersonal skills
o Ability to learn and use new and modern tools

o Ethical Behavior
o Ability to factor in sustainability, ethical, health, public safety, and environmental

issues in the solutions developed
Employer Survey - 4
o Extent of application of Project management principles in the projects handled/being

handled by him/her
o Extent of critical analysis competency exhibited in solving complex engineering problems

o Enthusiasm in participating your CSR activities
o Any specific negative traits observed
o Open suggestions for improving the quality of our diplomats
_______________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using the Survey Data - 1
Using the survey data for evaluating the attainment of a PO or PSO or PEO is
same: Example: PO 4 (Engineering Tools)
1. Identify the responses that are relevant to this PO from each

survey. Example:
27
“Rate the Ability to learn and use new engineering tools” from Employer Survey
“New tools (outside the formal curriculum) learnt”
from Program Exit Survey and so on ...
2. With data from only one type of survey, find the average rating for one relevant question.
Example (cont’d): Using Program Exit Survey
50 people answered the example question given earlier; 6 rated 1 (low); 35 rated 4; and
9 rated 5. So, the average is: 3.82
3. Repeat for all other relevant questions from the same survey
Example (cont’d): Assume there are 3 other relevant questions and their average ratings are 3.91,
4.15, and 4.88
4. The final average rating from this survey is 4.19
5. Set target levels of attainment
6. Example: Average value from a Survey is

<3 Level 1
≥ 3 and < 4 Level 2

≥4 Level 3
(Other ranges are possible; discuss in department and record the justifications for setting
the target levels the way they are set)
7. So, Attainment of PO 4 from the survey under consideration is:

4.19 Level 3
8. Repeat with other types of Surveys if relevant.
9. Compute the grand average as the Final Value of Attainment of this

PO Example: Attainment of PO5
From Program Exit Survey: Level 3

From Alumni Survey: Level 3
From Employer Survey: Level 2
Final Value: (3+3+2) / 3 = 2.67
10. Repeat this for each PO, PSO, and PEO Surveys useful for Pos and PSOs:
Program Exit Survey, Alumni Survey, Employer Survey

Surveys useful for PEOs: Alumni Survey, Employer Survey
Alternative approach for combining results from different surveys:
o Previous approach: Result of each survey was immediately quantized in to one of the
3 levels
o Alternatively: We can retain the average value computed for each survey (without
quantizing); find the grand average value from all the relevant surveys; and then
quantize!
Example: Attainment of PO4
Values from Program Exit Survey=4.19

Alumni Survey=4.32
Employer Survey3.79
28

Grand Average =(4.19+ 4.32+ 3.79 )/3= 4.1 Level 3
Using the Survey Data

Exercise
Course Surveys
o Course Surveys: Mid-Course ; Course-End
o Written / Electronic; Signed / Anonymous
o Mid-Course Survey:
– Typically, about a 2 month after the start of the course

– Useful for corrections in course delivery
o Course-End Survey:
– At the end of the course
– Useful for “closing the quality loop”
– May be used in computing course attainment, though the manual does not explicitly
recognize this approach!
Mid-Course Survey
o Helpful for mid-course corrections
o Typical Questions to be answered by all the students
(on a scale of 1 to 5 – most negative to most positive response):
– COS are clear
– Pace of coverage is comfortable
– Instruction is aligned to COs
– Questions are encouraged
– Good access to learning resources
– Examples are worked out well
– Good communication skills (of Faculty)
– Supportive attitude (of Faculty) ... ..
Course-End Survey
o Helpful for : “closing the loop”
o Can be used in computing attainments of COs
o Questions generally cover:
– Course Management
– Learning Environment
– Attainment of COs
– Instructor characteristics ... ... ...
o Typical Questions to be answered by all the students
(on a scale of 1 to 5 – most negative to most positive response):
– COs were clear
– Instructional activities helped in attaining Cos
29
– Pace of coverage was comfortable
o Questions were encouraged
o Had good access to learning resources
o Examples were worked out well and also useful for Examinations
o Instructor had good communication skills
o Instructor’s attitude was supportive

o How much did you learn?
o Any specific CO(s) that you are not confident of? (Tick them in the list below)
o The course helped you in improving your problem solving abilities ... ... ...
Using the Survey Data
o Find the average rating for one relevant question.

Example: For a question related to CO3, of the 65
answers:
6 rated 1 (low); 54 rated 4; and 5 rated 5. So,

the average is :( 6x1+54x4+5x5)/65=3.8
It corresponds to (as per our own settings)
The above can be normalized as :( 6x1+54x4+5x5)/65x5 =0.76(76%)
i.e Level 2 (medium)!
o Repeat for all other relevant questions
o The final attainment of that CO is the average of all these values

o This process is repeated for all the COs
Combining Direct & Indirect Evaluations
o The attainment levels obtained by direct methods and course-end survey can
be combined to get the final level of attainment.
o The relative weights need to be decided upon. (90% and 10% to 80% and 20%?)
o Example:CO3
– Direct method (SBTE Examination + Internal Assessment): 1.9
– Based on Course-End Survey: 2
– Final Value: (0.9 x 1.9) + (0.1 x 2) = 1.91
30
Rubrics
Rubrics - Introduction
o What?
– A Scoring Tool useful for subjective assessments
– A more systematic way of evaluating performance of students on tasks such as
Seminars, Projects , Term Papers ...
o Must be shared up front with students
– Enables students “do” what is expected
– Makes the process more transparent
– Allows self-evaluation by students
o Components:
– Attributes
– Descriptors
– Scores
Rubrics - Attributes
o The criteria by which the performance is to be evaluated.

o Are derived from the planned outcomes
Example:
For a Technical Seminar on workshop technology, some of the attributes can be:
– Verbal Skills
– Body language
– Technical Content
o The more clearly articulated the attributes, the better will be the usefulness of the
rubrics
o Your comments on the above list?
o Attributes can be organized hierarchically (attributes, sub-attributes)

Example:
– Verbal Communication
o Grammatically correct sentences

o Semantically clear sentences
o “Filler words”
o Voice Modulation
o ...
– Non-Verbal Communication
o Eye-Contact
o Posture
o ...
Descriptors
For each (sub) Attribute:
• Provide descriptions of performance at different levels of “quality”
31
• The levels can be 3 to 5 (typical)
• Number of Levels

– Too small Not much discrimination

– Too large Taxing for all
– No hard and fast rule
• Avoid stand-alone vague descriptors
o (Excellent, Creative, Weak,...)
• Descriptors need to be as specific as possible
• Good descriptors
– More objective evaluation
– More helpful for students in preparing well
Example: 3 Levels for “References Section in a Term Paper”
– GOOD (Highest Level): Latest references (up to the previous year) are included;
References are cited as per the specified standard (say IEEE Standard);
References cited cover the subject matter comprehensively.
– AVERAGE (Intermediate Level):...
– POOR (Low Level): Only old (...) references; Many of the References are not cited as
per the specified standard; References cited poorly cover the subject matter.
Scores
For each level of descriptor of each (sub)

Attribute: o Assign scores
o Can be a single value or a range of values

o Avoid a range that is too wide
Example: For the descriptors given earlier –

Good Level: 8 to 10
Average Level: 4 to 7
Low Level: 0 to 3
Rubrics – Template (partly filled)

o Seminar Presentation:
32
Criteria Descriptors with Scores
Use of Communication Communication Communication Communication

Communi- aids enhance aids contribute to aids marginally aids are poorly
cation Aids presentation. The the quality of the contribute to the used. Font size is
font on the presentation. quality of the too small to read.
visuals is readable. Font size is presentation. Too much
Information is mostly readable. Font size is information is
represented and Appropriate mostly readable. included. Details
organized to information is Information or some
maximize audience included. Some included is often unimportant
comprehension. times main unimportant information is
Details are points are Some times main highlighted, and
minimized so that obscured by points may confuse the
main points excessive details are obscured by audience (0-1)
stand out. (8-10) (4-7) excessive details
(2-3)
Program Curriculum, T-L and Other Processes; Highly Doable and Highly Useful
Curricular Gaps
Process (One possible approach):
 HoD, Faculty, Alumni, Current Final-Year Students, Industry, University, Faculty

from other Academic Institutes,...
o Map all the COs (Core Subjects only) to POs and PSOs
o If any POs / PSOs are addressed in common by all the electives, record
them
o Examine the strength of mappings to the POs and PSOs
o Identify weakly addressed POs and PSOs!

o Record the MoM
o Brainstorm the additional content required to address the identified curricular gaps and
record the final decisions
o Deliver the content beyond the curriculum as planned
o Treat this as you would treat any other course! (Measure attainments, close the
quality loop etc)
Example:
o Analysis of mapping of all courses to POs and PSOs reveals that one of the PSOs
that is not being addressed adequately by the diploma Curriculum is “Additive
manufacturing”
o Planned additional content:
– An additional 4-Hour Module in the work shop technology Course on Additive

manufacturing; Assessment is by Group Discussion of a Case Study
– An additional 3-Day Hands-On Training Program on Additive manufacturing delivered in
Collaboration with Industry; Assessment is by a Lab

Processes followed to improve the quality of Teaching – Learning:
33
o Course plan– (fortnightly?) Review – Recorded corrective action plans where
necessary – Course-end review
o Activity-based learning
o Tool-supported instruction
o Tech-support for weak students (including LMS, Discussion forums, Google

Groups,...)
o Challenges, learning resource support, and rewards (not in terms of class grades!?)
for bright students
o Open-ended experiments in the laboratories and support for conducting them
o Rubrics for continuous evaluation in the laboratory
o Mid-course, end-course surveys, data analysis, recorded improvement actions, follow-

up on the effectiveness of such measures
o Case-study based learning
o (Tech) Book Study Clubs and follow-up

Quality of Internal Assessment:
oProcess to ensure quality
o Process to ensure quality of IA Papers

o Evidence of coverage of COs
oQuality of Assignments and relevance to COs
o Assessment plan – prepared, reviewed, revised, and shared up-front with

students; Includes CO- Assessment Item mapping
o Academic audit of assessment instruments
o Incentives for assignments where they cannot be part of formal internal assessment
Quality of Student Projects:

o Process to identify and allocate projects
o Type, relevance, relation to POs and PSOs

o Process for monitoring and evaluation
o Process to assess individual and team performance

o Quality of completed projects/working prototypes
o Evidence of papers published/awards received
o Milestones for review and evaluation; recorded evidence
o Rubrics for project evaluation
Industry-Institute Interaction:
o Industry – supported laboratories
o Industry participation in Program Design and Course Delivery (even partial)

Internships, Summer Training:
o Industrial training / tours
o Impact analysis of industrial tour

o Student feedback on such initiatives
34
To Do for Accreditation
Discuss:
o Establish Student ISTE Chapters organize some events, and maintain full records
o Bring out a Institutional magazine covering technical literature/ news letter (Once in
year)
o Faculty Performance Appraisal and Development System (FPADS) – Define,

implement, and record
o industry people Technical talks (at least 2 lecturer of 3 hrs duration of interaction per
program in a semester): Organize, Record
o Record the Maintenance Process of tools used in labs of polytechnics (Preventive /
Corrective / Calibration) and record data
o Establish a Industry assisted Project Laboratory (Facilities, Rules for Usage etc)
o Define Safety Procedures and display in Laboratories; Define Review process and
record minutes of meeting
o Establish an Internal quality assurance Cell, define its functions, articulate the process
details, and record the actions etc
o Establish a formal Proctor System, define its functions, articulate the process details,
and record the actions etc
o Faculty Evaluation by Students: Process details, records, actions taken, rewards, ...
o Comprehensive Student Feedback: On Resources, Procedures,...
o Self-Learning Facilities (other than traditional library)
o Career guidance, Training, and Placement Activities: Already exist! Record

the processes, maintain records
o Records of co-curricular and extra-curricular activities

o Service Rules – Formal Document
o Recruitment and Promotional Policies – Formal

Documents o Formal budgetary planning, analysis
o ... ... ...
Conclusion
o Additional efforts required to attain the POs and PSOs

o Must follow the Quality Cycle
o Involve all the stake holders

o Maintain the Records
35
Road Map of NBA
Date: 06/09/2018
Minutes of Meeting
Phase 1:
Identification of CO & PO and their mapping for 2014-18 batch
The Deadline is set on 15/09/2018
Phase 2:
The documents of the following should be prepared by the program coordinator.
Criteria 1 (Need to wet it out from the existing SAR and get it signed by the HoD)
Graduate Exit Survey
Employer Survey
Alumni Survey
Vision, Mission, BoS
Phase 2 ends with PO attainment (2014-18 batch)

Invited talk by Prof. Guru Prasad, BMSCE
Phase 3:
CO attainment for the remaining batches by Course-coordinator/Course-Faculty
Parallel Activity - Program Coordinator to check and prepare the documents

Staff-Student Ratio (1:20)
Cadre Ratio (1:2:6)
Lab Upgradation
Submission of Prequalifier
Phase 4:
SAR to be completed (Draft)

Final SAR to be filed 30/11/2018
Phase 5:
Criteria 2 – TLP (inking and supporting documentation)
Program Coordinator – List out the documents for all the criteria
All the Staff members – Prepare the documents

Final Stage:
Internal Audit by Internal Experts

Gap Analysis 31-01-2019
Closing the Gaps 05-02-2019
Mock NBA by External Expert 10-02-2019
Close All the NBA work 20-02-2019

School of Electrical Engineering
Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering
NBA ROAD MAP-2018-19

Month September October November December January February
Phases Phase-1 Phase-2 Phase-3 Phase-4 Phase-5
Deadlines 15th September 2018 30/09/2018 15/10/2018 30/11/2018 15/01/2019 20-02-2019

Dept. Coordinators
Draft SAR- Tier-1 (1000)
HOD, PC,CC,CI PART-A of SAR

PART-B of SAR
CRITERION-1: Vision,
Mission, PEOs (50)
PC
(Institute)
HOD,PC, CC,CI CRITERION-2: Program Curriculum, TLP (100)
Filing SAR- NBA
HOD,PC,CC,CI CRITERION-3: Course Outcomes, Program Outcomes (175) Tier-1 (1000) MOCK
HOD,PC & (Close Gap)
CRITERION-4: Students Performance (100) (Preparation of
HOD,PC Supporting
CRITERION-5: Faculty Information and Contributions (200) Documents,
Internal Audit)
HOD,PC CRITERION-6: Facilities and Technical Support (80)
HOD, PC, CC,CI CRITERION-7: Continuous Improvement (75)
PC, BS (PC) CRITERION-8: First Year Academics (50)
HOD,PC CRITERION-9: Student Support Systems (50)
HOD,PC CRITERION-10: Governance, Institutional Support and Financial Resources (120)
HOD,PC
Inking of NBA Prequalifier & Filing of NBA Prequalifier (Tier-1)
PC (Dept.) HOD PC (Institute) DIRECTOR
PC: Program Coordinator

CC: Course Coordinator
CI: Course Incharge
Evaluation Guidelines with indicative exhibits/context to be Observed/Assessed - SAR Tier – I (UG Engineering)
First Time Accreditation
Exhibits/Context to be Observed/Assessed:
A. Adequacy
Department Vision, Mission and PEOs: Availability on Institute website under relevant program link; Availability at department notice boards, HoD
Chamber, department website, if Available; Availability in department level documents/course of study
B. Process of dissemination
Documentary evidence to indicate the process which ensures awareness among internal and external stakeholders with effective process implementation
C. Extent of Awareness
Based on interaction with internal and external stakeholders
1.4. State the process for defining the 15 A. Description of process involved in defining the Vision, Mission of the Department (7)
Vision and Mission of the B. Description of process involved in defining the PEOs of the program (8)
Department, and PEOs of the
program
Documentary evidence to indicate the process which ensures effective participation of internal and external department stakeholders with effective
process implementation
1.5. Establish consistency of PEOs with 10 A. Preparation of a matrix of PEOs and elements of Mission statement (5)
Mission of the Department B. Consistency/justification of co-relation parameters of the above matrix (5)
A. Availability of a matrix having PEOs and Mission elements B. Justification for each of the elements mapped in the matrix
Total: 50
2
Criterion 1: Vision, Mission and Program Educational Objectives (50)
Evaluation Guidelines
Sub Criteria Marks
1.1. State the Vision and Mission of the 05 A. Availability of the Vision & Mission statements of the Department (1)
Department and Institute B. Appropriateness/Relevance of the Statements (2)
C. Consistency of the Department statements with the Institute statements (2)
(Here Institute Vision and Mission statements have been asked to ensure consistency with the
department Vision and Mission statements; the assessment of the Institute Vision and Mission
will be done in Criterion 10)
A. Vision & Mission Statements B. Correctness from definition perspective C. Consistency between Institute and Department statements
1.2. State the Program Educational 05 A. Listing of the Program Educational Objectives (3 to 5) of the program under consideration
Objectives (PEOs) (5)
A. Availability & correctness of the PEOs statements
1.3. Indicate where and how the Vision, 15 A. Adequacy in respect of publication & dissemination (3)
Mission and PEOs are published and B. Process of dissemination among stakeholders (3)
disseminated among stakeholders C. Extent of awareness of Vision, Mission & PEOs among the stakeholder (9)
1
Criterion 2: Program Curriculum and Teaching–Learning Processes (100)
Sub Criteria Marks Evaluation Guidelines
2.1. Program Curriculum 30

2.1.1. State the process for designing the 10 Process used to demonstrate how the program curriculum is evolved and periodically reviewed
program curriculum considering the POs and PSOs. Also consider the involvement of the Industry.
Documentary evidence to indicate the process which demonstrate how the program curriculum is evolved and periodically reviewed considering the POs
and PSOs.
2.1.2. Structure of the Curriculum 05 Refer to SAR: Expectation in 2.1.2 & 2.1.3 is that the curriculum is well balanced structure &
appropriate for a degree program.
2.1.3.State the components of the 05 Refer to SAR: Expectation in 2.1.2 & 2.1.3 is that the curriculum is well balanced structure &
curriculum appropriate for a degree program
Documentary evidence
2.1.4. State the process used to identify 10 Process used to identify extent of compliance of curriculum for attaining POs & PSOs (10)
extent of compliance of the
3
curriculum for attaining the
Program Outcomes(POs) &
Program Specific Outcomes(PSOs)
Documentary evidence to indicate the process which ensures mapping/compliance of Curriculum with the POs & PSOs.
2.2. Teaching-Learning Processes 70
2.2.1. Describe the Process followed to 15 A. Adherence to Academic Calendar (2)
improve quality of Teaching B. Pedagogical initiatives (2)
Learning C. Methodologies to support weak students and encourage bright students(2)
D. Quality of classroom teaching (Observation in a Class) (2)
E. Conduct of experiments (Observation in Lab) (2)
F. Continuous Assessment in the laboratory (3)
G. Student feedback of teaching learning process and actions taken (2)
A. Availability of Academic Calendar based on University academic calendar and its effective compliance
B. Documentary evidence to support implementation of pedagogical initiatives such as real life examples, collaborative learning, ICT supported learning,
interactive class rooms etc.
C. Guidelines to identify weak and bright students; post identification actions taken; impact observed
D. Class room ambience; efforts to keep students engaged (also to be verified during interaction with the students)
E. Quality of laboratory experience with respect to conducting, recording observations, analysis etc.(also to be verified during interaction with the
students)
F. Internal Semester examination and internal marks thereof, Practical record books, each experiment assessment, final marks based on assessment of
all the experiments and other assessments; if any
G. Feedback format, frequency, analysis and actions taken (also to be verified during interaction with students)
4
2.2.2. Quality of end semester examination, 15 A. Process for internal semester question paper setting and evaluation and effective process
internal semester question papers, implementation (3)
assignments and evaluation B. Process to ensure questions from outcomes/learning levels perspective (2)
C. Evidence of COs coverage in class test / mid-term tests (5)
D. Quality of Assignment and its relevance to COs (5)
A. Process of internal semester question paper setting, model answers, evaluation and its compliance
B. Question paper validation to ensure desired standard from outcome attainment perspective as well as learning levels perspective
C. Mapping of questions with the Course outcomes
D. Assignments to promote self-learning, survey of contents from multiple sources, assignment evaluation and feedback to the students, mapping with the
COs
2.2.3. Quality of student projects 20 A. Identification of projects and allocation methodology to Faculty Members (2)
B. Types and relevance of the projects and their contribution towards attainment of POs and
PSOs (2)
C. Project related to Industry (3)
D. Process for monitoring and evaluation (2)
E. Process to assess individual and team performance (3)
F. Quality of completed projects/working prototypes (5)
G. Evidences of papers published /Awards received by projects etc. (3)
A. Projects identification and guide allocation Process

B. Projects classification (application, product, research, review etc.) consideration to factors such as environment, safety, ethics, cost, standards and
mapping with program outcomes and program specific outcomes
C. Continuous monitoring mechanism and evaluation
D. Methodology(Appropriately documented) to assess individual contribution/understanding of the project as well as collective
contribution/understanding
E. Based on Projects demonstration
F. Quality of place (host) where the paper has been published /quality of competition in which award has been won
5
10 A. Industry supported laboratories (2)
2.2.4. Initiatives related to industry B. Industry involvement in the program design and Curriculum. (3)
interaction C. Industry involvement in partial delivery of any regular courses for students (3)
D. Impact analysis of industry institute interaction and actions taken thereof (2)
A. Type of Industries, Type of Labs, objectives, utilization and effectiveness

B. Documentary evidence
C. Analysis and actions taken thereof
10 A. Industrial training/tours for students (2)
B. Industrial /internship /summer training of more than two weeks and post training Assessment
2.2.5. Initiatives related to industry
(3)
internship/summer training
C. Impact analysis of industrial training (2)
D. Student feedback on initiative (3)
Exhibits/Context to be Observed/Assessed: (Documentary evidence from A to D)
A. & B. Type of Industries, planned or non-planned activity, objectives clearly defined, no. of students participated, relevant area of training, visit report
documented
C.& D. Impact analysis and feedback format, analysis and actions taken (also to be verified during interaction with students)
Total: 100
6
Criterion 3: Course Outcomes and Program Outcomes (175)
3.1. Establish the correlation between 25 A. Evidence of COs being defined for every course (5)
the courses and the POs & B. Availability of COs embedded in the syllabi (5)
PSOs C. Explanation of Course Articulation Matrix table to be ascertained (5)
D. Explanation of Program Articulation Matrix tables to be ascertained (10)
A. Appropriateness of the statements shall be seen for atleast one course each from 2nd, 3rd and final year of study
B. Mapping to be verified for atleast two matrices
C. Mapping to be verified for atleast one course per year of study; program outcomes and program specific outcomes getting mapped with the
core courses are also to be verified
3.2. Attainment of Course Outcomes 75
3.2.1. Describe the assessment tools and 10 A. List of assessment processes (2)
processes used to gather the data B. The quality /relevance of assessment processes & tools used (8)
upon which the evaluation of
Course Outcome is based
A. & B. Evidence for appropriate assessment processes including data collection, verification, analysis, decision making
3.2.2. Record the attainment of Course 65 A. Verify the attainment levels as per the benchmark set for all courses (65)
Outcomes of all courses with respect
to set attainment levels
7
A. Methodology to define set levels and its compliance; data collection, verification, analysis and decision making; details for one course per year of
study to be verified
3.3. Attainment of Program Outcomes 75

and Program Specific Outcomes
3.3.1.Describe assessment tools and 10 A. List of assessment tools & processes (5)
processes used for assessing the B. The quality/relevance of assessment tools/processes used (5)
attainment of each of the POs &
PSOs
A.&B. Direct and indirect assessment tools & processes ; effective compliance; direct assessment methodology, indirect assessment formats-collection-
analysis; decision making based on direct and indirect assessment
3.3.2. Provide results of evaluation of each 65 A. Verification of documents, results and level of attainment of each PO/PSO (50)
PO & PSO B. Overall levels of attainment (15)
A. & B. Appropriate attainment level and documentary evidences; details for POs & PSOs attainment from core courses to be verified. Also atleast two
POs & two PSOs attainment levels shall be verified
Total 175
8
Criterion 4: Students’ Performance (100)
20 A. >= 90% students enrolled at the First Year Level on average basis during the previous
4.1. Enrolment Ratio (20)
three academic years starting from current academic year (20)
B. >= 80% students enrolled at the First Year Level on average basis during the previous
C. >= 70% students enrolled at the First Year Level on average basis during the previous
D. >= 60% students enrolled at the First Year Level on average basis during the previous
E. Otherwise ‘0’.
A. B. & C. Data to be verified for each of the assessment years
4.2. Success Rate in the stipulated period 20

of the program
4.2.1. Success rate without backlog in any 15 SI= (Number of students who graduated from the program without repeat(s) in any
Semester/year of study course)/(Number of students admitted in the first year of that batch and actually admitted in 2nd
year via lateral entry and separate division, if applicable)
Without Backlog means: No repeat(s) in Average SI = Mean of success index (SI) for past three batches
any course in any semester/year of study Success rate without backlogs in any year of study = 15 × Average SI
Data to be verified for each of the assessment years
4.2.2. Success rate with backlog in 5 SI= (Number of students who graduated from the program with backlog in the stipulated period of
stipulated period (actual duration of the course duration)/(Number of students admitted in the first year of that batch and actually admitted
9
program) in 2nd year via lateral entry and separate division, if applicable)
Average SI = mean of success index (SI) for past three batches
Success rate = 5 × Average SI
Data to be verified for each of the assessment years

Note: if 100% students clear without any backlog then also total marks scored will be 40 as both 4.2.1 & 4.2.2 will be applicable simultaneously.
4.3. Academic Performance in Second 10 Academic Performance Level = Average API (Academic Performance Index)
Year API = ((Mean of 2nd Year Grade Point Average of all successful Students on a 10 point scale) or
(Mean of the percentage of marks of all successful student sin Second Year/10)) x (successful
students/number of students appeared in the examination)
Successful students are those who are permitted to proceed to the Third year
Data to be verified for atleast one of the assessment years
4.4. Placement, Higher studies and 30 Assessment Points = 30 × average of three years of [ (x + y + z)/N] where, x = Number of
Entrepreneurship students placed in companies or Government sector through on/off campus recruitment
y = Number of students admitted to higher studies with valid qualifying scores (GATE or
equivalent State or National level tests, GRE, GMAT etc.)
z = No. of students turned entrepreneur in engineering/technology
N =Total number of final year students
4.5. Professional Activities 20
10
4.5.1. Professional societies / chapters and 05 A. Availability & activities of professional societies/chapters (3)
organizing engineering events B. Number, quality of engineering events (organized at institute) (2)
(Level - Institute/State/National/International)
Self Explanatory
4.5.2. Publication of technical magazines, 05 A. Quality & Relevance of the contents and Print Material (3)
newsletters, etc. B. Participation of Students from the program (2)
A. Documentary evidence
B. Documentary evidence - Students participation (also to be confirmed during interaction with the students)
4.5.3. Participation in inter-institute events 10 A. Events within the state (2)

by students of the program of B. Events outside the state (3)
study (at other institutions) C. Prizes/awards received in such events (5)
A.B.& C. Quality of events and documentary evidence
Total: 100
11
Criterion 5: Faculty Information and Contributions (200)
5.1. Student-Faculty Ratio (SFR) 20 Marks to be given proportionally from a maximum of 20 to a minimum of 10 for average SFR between 15:1
to 25:1, and zero for average SFR higher than 25:1. Marks distribution is given as below:
< = 15 - 20 Marks
< = 17 - 18 Marks
< = 19 - 16 Marks
< = 21 - 14 Marks
< = 23 - 12 Marks
< = 25 - 10 Marks
> 25 - 0 Marks
 SFR is to be verified considering the faculty of the entire department.

 No. of Regular faculty calculation considering Regular faculty definition*; Faculty appointment letters, time table, subject allocation file, salary
statements.
 No. of students calculation as mentioned in the SAR(please refer table under criterion 5.1)
 Faculty Qualification as per AICTE guidelines shall only be counted
*Note: Minimum 75% should be Regular/ full time faculty and the remaining shall be Contractual Faculty as per AICTE norms and standards.
The contractual faculty (doing away with the terminology of visiting/adjunct faculty, whatsoever) who have taught for 2 consecutive semesters in the
corresponding academic year on full time basis shall be considered for the purpose of calculation in the Student Faculty Ratio.
12
5.2. Faculty Cadre Proportion 20 Cadre Proportion Marks =
AF1 + AF2 x 0.6 + AF3 x 0.4 x 10

RF1 RF2 RF3
• If AF1 = AF2= 0 then zero marks

• Maximum marks to be limited if it exceeds 20
(Refer calculation in SAR)
(Faculty Qualification and experience required for cadre posts shall only be considered as per AICTE norms/guidelines)
 Cadre wise No. of faculty available; Faculty qualification and experience and eligibility; Appointment/Promotion orders
 Cadre wise no. of faculty required as per AICTE guidelines (refer calculation in SAR)
5.3. Faculty Qualification 20 FQ = 2.0 x [{10X +4Y}/F] where
X is no. of faculty with Ph.D., Y is no. of faculty with M.Tech., F is no. of faculty required to
comply 1:20 Faculty Student ratio
(no. of faculty and no. of students required to be calculated as per 5.1)
 Documentary evidence – Faculty Qualification
5.4 Faculty Retention 10 A.  90% of required Faculties retained during the period of assessment keeping CAYm3 as base
year (10)
B.  75% of required Faculties retained during the period of assessment keeping CAYm3 as base
year (08)
C.  60% of required Faculties retained during the period of assessment keeping CAYm3 as base
13
year (06)
D.  50% of required Faculties retained during the period of assessment keeping CAYm3 as base
year (04)
E. Otherwise (0)
 Faculty date of joining; atleast three month (July-April-May) salary statement for each of the assessment years
5.5. Faculty competencies in correlation 10 A. Specialization

to Program Specific Criteria B. Research Publications
C. Course Developments
D. Other relevant points
5.6. Innovations by the Faculty in 10 A. Statement of clear goals, use of appropriate methods, significance of results, effective
Teaching and Learning presentation (4)
B. Availability of work on the Institute Website (2)
C. Availability of work for peer review and critique (2)
D. Reproducibility and Reusability by other scholars for further development (2)
A. Availability on Institute website; awareness among faculty and students of the department
B. & C. Self explanatory
D. Innovations that contribute to the improvement of student learning, typically include use of ICT, instruction delivery, instructional methods, assessment,
evaluation etc.
5.7 Faculty as participants in Faculty 15 For each year: Assessment = 3×Sum/0.5RF
development /training Average assessment over last three years starting from CAYm1 (Marks limited to 15)
activities /STTPs
14
 Relevance of the training/development program
 No. of days; No. of faculty
5.8. Research and Development 75
5.8.1. Academic Research 20 A. Number of quality publications in refereed/SCI Journals, citations, Books/Book Chapters
etc. (15)
B. PhD awarded during the assessment period while working in the institute (5)
A. Quality of publications; publications copy

B. Documentary evidence
5.8.2 Sponsored Research 20 Funded research from outside; Cumulative during CAYm1, CAYm2 and CAYm3
Amount > 50 Lakh – 20 Marks,
Amount >40 and < 50 Lakh – 15 Marks,
Amount< 15 Lakh – 0 Marks
 Documentary evidence; Funding agency, Amount, Duration, Research progress; Outcome
5.8.3 Development Activities 15 A. Product Development

B. Research laboratories
C. Instructional materials
D. Working models/charts/monograms etc.
15
Self -explanatory
5.8.4. Consultancy (From Industry) 20 Consultancy; Cumulative during CAYm1, CAYm2 and CAYm3
Amount >10 Lakh – 20 Marks,
Amount <10 and > 8 Lakh – 15 Marks,
Amount < 8 and > 6 Lakh – 10 Marks,
Amount < 2 Lakh – 0 Mark
 Documentary evidence; Funding agency, Amount, Duration, Research progress; Outcome
5.9. Faculty Performance Appraisal and 10 A. A well-defined performance appraisal and development system instituted for all the assessment
Development System (FPADS) years (5)
B. Its implementation and effectiveness (5)
A. Notified performance appraisal and development system; Appraisal Parameters; Awareness

B. Implementation, Transparency and Effectiveness
5.10. Visiting/Adjunct/Emeritus Faculty 10  Provision of Visiting /Adjunct/Emeritus faculty etc.(1)

etc.  Minimum 50 hours per year interaction (per year to obtain three marks : 3 x 3 = 9)
 Documentary evidence
Total: 200
16
Criterion 6: Facilities and Technical Support (80)
6.1.Adequate and well equipped A. Adequate well-equipped laboratories to run all the program-specific curriculum (25)
40
laboratories, and technical manpower B. Availability of adequate and qualified technical supporting staff (15)
A. Adequacy; well-equipped laboratories; utilization

B. Self - explanatory
6.2. Laboratories: Maintenance and Maintenance and overall ambience (10 )
10
overall ambience
Self-explanatory
6.3. Safety measures in laboratories 10 Safety measures in laboratories (10)
Self -explanatory
6.4. Project laboratory/Facilities 20 Facilities & Utilization (20)
Self -explanatory
Total: 80
17
Criterion 7: Continuous Improvement (75)

7.1.Actions taken based on the results of 30 A. Documentary evidences of POs and PSOs attainment levels (15)
evaluation of each of the POs and B. Identification of gaps/shortfalls (05)
PSOs C. Plan of action to bridge the gap and its Implementation (10)
 Documentary evidence in respect of each of the POs

7.2 Academic Audit and actions taken 15 A. Assessment shall be based on conduct and actions taken in relation to continuous improvement
during the period of Assessment (15)
A. Academic Audit assessment criteria, frequency, conduct mechanism, action plan based on audit, implementation and effectiveness
7.3. Improvement in Placement, 10 Assessment is based on improvement in: (Refer placement index 4.5)
Higher Studies and Entrepreneurship A. Improvement in Placement numbers, quality, core hiring industry and pay packages (5)
B. Improvement in Higher Studies admissions for pursuing PhD. in premier institutions(3)
C. Improvement in number of Entrepreneurs (2)
(Marks to be given proportionately considering nos. in the base year CAYm3)
A. B. & C. Nos. in each year of the assessment; improvement considering CAYm3 as a base year
7.4. Improvement in the quality of 20 A. Assessment is based on improvement in terms of ranks/score in qualifying state level/national
students admitted to the program level entrances tests, percentage Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics marks in 12th Standard
and percentage marks of the lateral entry students
A. Documentary evidence – list of students admitted; admission authority guidelines; ranks/scores; comparative status considering CAYm3 as a base
year
Total: 75
18
Criterion 8: First Year Academics (50)
Sub Criteria Marks
For each year of assessment = (5 × 20)/ FYSFR
8.1. First Year Student- Faculty Ratio (Limited to Max. 5) Average of Assessment of data in CAY, CAYm1 and CAYm2
05
(FYSFR)
*Note: If FYSFR is greater than 25, then assessment equal to zero.
 No. of Regular faculty calculation considering Regular faculty definition and fractional load; Faculty appointment letters; Salary statements
 No. of students calculation as mentioned in the SAR
A. Assessment of faculty qualification (5x + 3y)/RF

8.2. Qualification of Faculty Teaching
05 B. Average of Assessment of previous three academic years including current academic year.
First Year Common Courses
(Refer 8.2. for x, y and RF)
 Documentary evidence – Faculty Qualification
Academic Performance = ((Mean of 1st Year Grade Point Average of all successful Students on a 10
point scale) or (Mean of the percentage of marks in First Year of all successful students/10)) x
8.3. First Year Academic Performance 10
(successful students/number of students appeared in the examination)
(Successful students are those who are permitted to proceed to the Second year)
19
8.4. Attainment of Course Outcomes

10
of first year courses
8.4.1. Describe the assessment processes
used to gather the data upon which
A. List of assessment processes (1)
the evaluation of Course 05
B. The relevance of assessment tools used (4)
Outcomes of first year is based
A. & B. Direct and indirect assessment(if applicable), tools & processes; effective compliance; direct assessment methodology, indirect assessment
formats-collection-analysis; decision making
8.4.2. Record the attainment of Course

Outcomes of all first year 05 A. Verify the records as per the benchmark set for the courses (5)
courses
A. Documentary evidence – Attainment for atleast 3 courses
8.5. Attainment of Program

20
Outcomes of all first year courses
8.5.1. Indicate results of evaluation of A. Process of computing POs/PSOs attainment level from the COs of related first year courses (5)
10
each relevant PO/PSO B. Verification of documents validating the above process (5)
A. & B. Documentary evidence for each relevant PO/PSO
A. Appropriate actions taken (10)
8.5.2. Actions taken based on the results
10
of evaluation of relevant POs /PSOs
20
A. Documentary evidence for each relevant PO/PSO
Total: 50
Criterion 9: Student Support Systems (50)
Sub Criteria Marks
A. Details of the mentoring system that has been developed for the students for various
9.1. Mentoring system to help at
05 purposes and also state the efficacy of such system (5)
individual level
A. Mentoring system terms of reference; implementation; effectiveness (also to be verified during interaction with the students)
9.2. Feedback analysis and reward A. Methodology being followed for analysis of feedback and its effectiveness (5)
10
/corrective measures taken, if any B. Record of corrective measures taken (5)
A. Feedback questions, collection process, analysis, actions taken, effectiveness
9.3. Feedback on facilities 05 A. Feedback collection, analysis and corrective action (5)
Self - explanatory
A. Scope for self-learning (2)

9.4. Self - Learning 05 B. The institution needs to specify the facilities, materials for learning beyond syllabus,
Webinars, Podcast, MOOCs etc. and demonstrate its effective utilization (3)
21
Self - explanatory
A. Availability of career guidance facilities (2)

9.5. Career Guidance, Training, B. Counseling for higher studies (GATE/GRE, GMAT, etc.) (2)
10
Placement C. Pre-placement training (3)
D. Placement process and support (3)
Availability, implementation, effectiveness (also to be verified during interaction with the students)
A. Entrepreneurship initiatives (3)

9.6. Entrepreneurship Cell 05
B. Data on students benefitted (2)
A. Availability of sports and cultural facilities (3)

9.7. Co-curricular and Extra-
10 B. NCC, NSS and other clubs (3)
curricular Activities
C. Annual students activities (4)
Total: 50
22
Criterion 10: Governance, Institutional Support and Financial Resources (120)
Sub Criteria Marks
10.1. Organization, Governance and

55
Transparency
10.1.1.State the Vision and Mission of A. Availability of the Vision & Mission statements of the Institute (2)
05
the Institute B. Appropriateness/ Relevance of the Statements (3)
A. Institute Vision and Mission statements: Availability of statements on Institute website; Availability at Central facilities such as Library, Computer
Center, Principal Chamber etc. Availability of one set of statements in each of the departments; Availability in Institute level documents
B. Correctness from definition perspective
10.1.2. Availability of the Institutional

Strategic Plan and its Effective
25 Availability of a 5 year Strategic Plan.
Implementation and Monitoring
10.1.3. Governing body, administrative A. List the Governing Body Composition and its Sub Committees, senate, and all other academic
setup, functions of various and administrative bodies; their memberships, functions, and responsibilities; frequency of the
bodies, service rules 10 meetings; participation details of external members and attendance therein (4)
procedures, recruitment and B. The published service rules, policies and procedures with year of publication (3)
promotional policies. C. Minutes of the meetings and action-taken reports (3)
23
Self - explanatory
A. Organizational Structure, List of Administrative Committees and Administrative Heads who

10.1.4. Decentralization in working
have been delegated powers for taking administrative decisions (1)
and grievance redressal 05
B. Specify the mechanism and composition of grievance redressal cell (1)
mechanism
C. Action taken report of representations (sample) (3)
A. B. & C. Documentary evidence
A. Financial powers delegated to the Principal, Heads of Departments and relevant in-charges (2)
10.1.5. Delegation of financial powers 05
B. Demonstrate the utilization of financial powers for each of the assessment years (3)
A. Circulars notifying financial powers

B. Documentary evidence to exhibit utilization at each levels during assessment years
10.1.6. Transparency and availability A. Information on the policies, rules, processes is to be made available on web site (2)
of correct/unambiguous 05 B. Dissemination of the information about student, faculty and staff (2)
information in public domain C. Mandatory disclosure as per AICTE/AISHE on the website. (1)
A. & B. Website and Documentary evidence
10.2. Budget Allocation, Utilization,

and Public Accounting at 15
Institute level
A. Quantum of budget allocation for three years (3)
10.2.1. Adequacy of Budget allocation 05
B. Justification of budget allocated for three years (2)
24
A. Budget formulation, finalization and approval process

B. Requirement – allocation –adequacy – justification thereof
10.2.2. Utilization of allocated funds 05 A. Budget utilization for three years (5)
A. Balance sheet; effective utilization; random verification for atleast two of the three assessment years
10.2.3. Availability of the audited 05 A. Availability of Audited statements on website (5)

statements on the institute’s
website
A. Website
10.3. Program Specific Budget 30 To be evaluated in consultation with the Program Experts
Allocation, Utilization
10.3.1. Adequacy of budget allocation 10 A. Quantum of budget allocation for three years (5)
B. Justification of budget allocated for three years (5)
A. Budget formulation, finalization and approval process

B. Requirement – allocation –adequacy – justification thereof
10.3.2. Utilization of allocated funds 20 A. Budget utilization for three years (20)
25
A. Balance sheet; effective utilization; random verification for atleast two of the three assessment years
10.4. Library and Internet 20
10.4.1. Quality of learning resources 10  Availability of relevant learning resources including e-resources and Digital Library (7)
(hard/soft)  Accessibility to students (3)
Availability; Adequacy; Effectiveness

(Also to be verified during interactions with the faculty and students)
10.4.2. Internet 10 A. Available bandwidth (4)

B. Wi Fi availability (2)
C. Internet access in labs, classrooms, library and offices of all Departments (2)
D. Security mechanism (2)
Availability as per AICTE norms; Adequacy; Effectiveness

(Also to be verified during interactions with the faculty and students)
Total: 120
26
SELF ASSESSMENT REPORT (SAR) FORMAT
UNDERGRADUATE ENGINEERING PROGRAMS (TIER-I)
FIRST TIME ACCREDITATION

(Applicable for all the programs, except those granted full accreditation for 5 years as per Jan 2013 Manual)
NBCC Place, 4th Floor East Tower, Bhisham Pitamah Marg,

Pragati Vihar New Delhi 110003
P: +91(11)24360620-22, 24360654
Fax: +91(11) 24360682
E-mail: membersecretary@nbaind.org
Website: www.nbaind.org
(December, 2015)
1
SAR Contents
Serial Code &

Item Page No.
Link to the Item
PART A Institutional Information 3-6
PART B Criteria Summary 7
Program Level Criteria
1 Vision, Mission and Program Educational Objectives 8
2 Program Curriculum and Teaching – Learning Processes 9-10
3 Course Outcomes and Program Outcomes 11-13
4 Students’ Performance 14-19
5 Faculty Information and Contributions 20-25
6 Facilities and Technical Support 26
7 Continuous Improvement 27 - 30
Institute Level Criteria
8 First Year Academics 31 - 34
9 Student Support Systems 35
10 Governance, Institutional Support and Financial Resources 36 - 40
PART C Declaration by the Institution 41
Program Outcomes(POs) & Program Specific Outcomes

Annexure I 42
(PSOs)
2
PART A: Institutional Information
1. Name and Address of the Institution:
2. Name and Address of the Affiliating University:
3. Year of establishment of the Institution:
4. Type of the Institution:
Institute of National Importance
University
Deemed University
Autonomous
Any other (Please specify)
Note:
1. In case of Autonomous and Deemed University, mention the year of grant of status by the
authority.
2. In case of University Constituent Institution, please indicate the academic autonomy status of the
Institution as defined in 12th Plan guidelines of UGC. Institute should apply for Tier 1 only when
fully academically autonomous.
5. Ownership Status:
Central Government
State Government
Government Aided
Self - financing
Trust
Society
Section 25 Company
Any Other (Please specify)
Provide Details:
3
6. Other Academic Institutions of the Trust/Society/Company etc., if any:
Year of
Name of the Institution(s) Programs of Study Location
Establishment
Table A.6
Note: Add rows as needed.
7. Details of all the programs being offered by the institution under consideration:
Name of the Increase/

Department Year Decrease Year of
S. Program AICTE Accreditation
of Intake Increase/
No. Name in intake, Approval Status*
Start Decrease
if any
Table A.7
* Write applicable one:
Applying first time
 Granted provisional accreditation for two/three years for the period(specify period)
 Granted accreditation for 5/6 years for the period (specify period)
 Not accredited (specify visit dates, year)
 Withdrawn (specify visit dates, year)
 Not eligible for accreditation
 Eligible but not applied
Note: Add rows as needed.
8. Programs to be considered for Accreditation vide this application
S. No. Program Name
N.
Table A.8
9. Total number of employees:
A. Regular Employees (Faculty and Staff):
CAY CAYm1 CAYm2

Items
Min Max Min Max Min Max
M
Faculty in Engineering
F
4
Faculty in Maths, Science M
&Humanities teaching in
engineering Programs F
M
Non-teaching staff
F
Table A.9a
Note: Minimum 75% should be Regular/Full Time faculty and the remaining shall be Contractual Faculty as
per AICTE norms and standards.
The contractual faculty (doing away with the terminology of visiting/adjunct faculty, whatsoever)
who have taught for 2 consecutive semesters in the corresponding academic year on full time basis
shall be considered for the purpose of calculation in the Student Faculty Ratio.
CAY – Current Academic Year

CAYm1- Current Academic Year minus1= Current Assessment Year
CAYm2 - Current Academic Year minus2=Current Assessment Year minus 1
B. Contractual Staff Employees (Faculty and Staff): (Not covered in Table A):
CAY CAYm1 CAYm2

Items
Min Max Min Max Min Max
M
Faculty in Engineering
F
Faculty in Maths, Science M

&Humanities teaching in
engineering Programs F
M
Non-teaching staff
F
Table A.9b
10. Total number of Engineering Students:
Item CAY CAYm1 CAYm2
Total no. of boys
Total no. of girls
Total no. of students
Table A.10
(Instruction: The data may be categorized in tabular form separately for undergraduate, postgraduate
engineering, other program, if applicable)
Note: In case the institution is running programs other than engineering programs, a separate table
giving similar details is to be included.
5
11. Vision of the Institution:
12. Mission of the Institution:
13. Contact Information of the Head of the Institution and NBA coordinator, if designated:
i. Name:
Designation:
Mobile No:
Email id:
ii. NBA coordinator, if designated

Name:
Designation:
Mobile No:
Email id:
6
PART B: Criteria Summary
Name of the program _______________________________________
Criteria No. Criteria Mark/Weightage
Program Level Criteria
1. Vision, Mission and Program Educational Objectives 50
2. Program Curriculum and Teaching –Learning Processes 100
3. Course Outcomes and Program Outcomes 175
4. Students’ Performance 100
5. Faculty Information and Contributions 200
6. Facilities and Technical Support 80
7. Continuous Improvement 75
Institute Level Criteria
8. First Year Academics 50
9. Student Support Systems 50
10. Governance, Institutional Support and Financial Resources 120
Total 1000
7
PART B: Program Level Criteria
CRITERION 1 Vision, Mission and Program Educational Objectives 50
1.1. State the Vision and Mission of the Department and Institute (5)
(Vision statement typically indicates aspirations and Mission statement states the broad approach to
achieve aspirations)
(Here Institute Vision and Mission statements have been asked to ensure consistency with the
department Vision and Mission statements; the assessment of the Institute Vision and Mission will be
taken up in Criterion 10)
1.2. State the Program Educational Objectives (PEOs) (5)
(State the PEOs (3 to 5) of program seeking accreditation)
1.3. Indicate where the Vision, Mission and PEOs are published and disseminated among
stakeholders (15)
(Describe where (websites, curricula, posters etc.) the Vision, Mission and PEOs are published and
detail the process which ensures awareness among internal and external stakeholders with effective
process implementation)
(Internal stakeholders may include Management, Governing Board Members, faculty, support staff,
students etc. and external stakeholders may include employers, industry, alumni, funding agencies,
etc.)
1.4. State the process for defining the Vision and Mission of the Department, and PEOs of the
program (15)
(Articulate the process involved in defining the Vision and Mission of the department and PEOs of
the program.)
1.5. Establish consistency of PEOs with Mission of the Department (10)
(Generate a “Mission of the Department – PEOs matrix” with justification and rationale of
the mapping)
PEO Statements M1 M2 …. Mn
PEO1:
PEO2:
PEON:
Table B.1.5
Note: M1, M2. . . Mn are distinct elements of Mission statement. Enter correlation levels 1, 2 or 3 as
defined below:
1: Slight (Low) 2: Moderate (Medium) 3: Substantial (High) If there is no correlation, put “-”
Note: Wherever the word “process” is used in this document its meaning is process formulation,
notification to all the concerned, and implementation
8
CRITERION 2 Program Curriculum and Teaching –Learning Processes 100
2.1. Program Curriculum (30)
2.1.1. State the process for designing the program curriculum (10)
(Describe the process that periodically documents and demonstrates how the program
curriculum is evolved considering the POs and PSOs)
2.1.2. Structure of the Curriculum (5)
Total Number of contact hours

Course Course
Lecture Tutorial Practical# Total Credits
Code Title
(L) (T) (P) Hours
Total
Table B.2.1.2
# Seminars, project works may be considered as practical
2.1.3. State the components of the curriculum (5)
Program curriculum grouping based on course components
Curriculum Content
(% of total number Total number of Total number of
Course Component
of credits of the contact hours credits
program )
Basic Sciences
Engineering Sciences
Humanities and Social
Sciences
Program Core
Program Electives
Open Electives
Project(s)
Internships/Seminars
Any other (Please
specify)
Total number of Credits
Table B.2.1.3
9
2.1.4. State the process used to identify extent of compliance of the curriculum for
attaining the Program Outcomes and Program Specific Outcomes as mentioned in
Annexure I (10)
(State the process details)
2.2. Teaching-Learning Processes (70)
2.2.1. Describe Processes followed to improve quality of Teaching & Learning (15)
(Processes may include adherence to academic calendar and improving instruction methods
using pedagogical initiatives such as real world examples, collaborative learning, quality of
laboratory experience with regard to conducting experiments, recording observations,
analysis of data etc. encouraging bright students, assisting weak students etc. The
implementation details and impact analysis need to be documented)
2.2.2. Quality of end semester examination, internal semester question papers,

assignments and evaluation (15)
(Mention the initiatives, implementation details and analysis of learning levels related to
quality of semester tests, assignments and evaluation)
2.2.3. Quality of student projects (20)
(Quality of the project is measured in terms of consideration to factors including, but not
limited to, environment, safety, ethics, cost, type (application, product, research, review etc.)
and standards. Processes related to project identification, allotment, continuous monitoring,
evaluation including demonstration of working prototypes and enhancing the relevance of
projects. Mention Implementation details including details of POs and PSOs addressed through
the projects with justification)
2.2.4. Initiatives related to industry interaction (10)
(Give details of the industry involvement in the program such as industry-attached

laboratories, partial delivery of appropriate courses by industry experts etc. Mention the
initiatives, implementation details and impact analysis)
2.2.5. Initiatives related to industry internship/summer training (10)
(Mention the initiatives, implementation details and impact analysis)
10
CRITERION 3 Course Outcomes and Program Outcomes 175
3.1. Establish the correlation between the courses and the Program Outcomes (POs) & Program
Specific Outcomes (25)
 NBA defined Program Outcomes as mentioned in Annexure I and Program Specific Outcomes as
defined by the Program. Six to ten matrices of core courses are to be mentioned with at least one
per semester.
 Select core courses to demonstrate the mapping/correlation with all POs and PSOs.
 Number of Outcomes for a Course is expected to be around 6.

Program Articulation Matrix
Course PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 PO7 PO8 PO9 PO10 PO11 PO12
C101
C202
C303
….
….
C4…
Table B.3.1a
Course Articulation Matrix
CO Statement PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 PO7 PO8 PO9 PO10 PO11 PO12
C202.1
C202.2
C202.n
C202
Table B.3.1b
Add and delete rows for Course Outcomes as needed
Note:
1. Enter correlation levels 1, 2 or 3 as defined below:
1: Slight (Low) 2: Moderate (Medium) 3: Substantial (High)
11
If there is no correlation, put “-”
2. Add more columns for PSOs
3. The table 3.1 can be prepared in landscape mode if required.
3.2. Attainment of Course Outcomes (75)
3.2.1. Describe the assessment tools and processes used to gather the data upon which the
evaluation of Course Outcome is based (10)
Describe different assessment tools (semester end examinations, mid-semester tests,

laboratory examinations, student portfolios etc) to measure the student learning and hence
attainment of course outcomes. (Student portfolio is a collection of artifacts that demonstrate
skills, personal characteristics and accomplishments created by the student during study
period.)
The process adopted to map the assessment questions, parameters of assessment rubrics etc.
to the course outcomes to be explained with examples. The process of data collection from
different assessment tools and the analysis of collected data to arrive at CO attainment levels
need to be explained with examples
3.2.2. Record the attainment of Course Outcomes of all courses with respect to set
attainment levels (65)
Program shall set Course Outcome attainment levels for all courses.
Measuring Course Outcomes attained through Semester End Examinations (SEE)
Target may be stated in terms of percentage of students getting equal or more than the
target set by the Program in SEE for each CO.
Measuring CO attainment through Cumulative Internal Examinations (CIE)
Target may be stated in terms of percentage of students getting more than class average
marks or set by the program in each of the associated COs in the assessment instruments
(midterm tests, assignments, mini projects, reports and presentations etc. as mapped with
the COs)
3.3. Attainment of Program Outcomes and Program Specific Outcomes (75)
3.3.1. Describe assessment tools and processes used for measuring the attainment of each
Program Outcome and Program Specific Outcomes (10)
(Describe the assessment tools and processes used to gather the data upon which the
evaluation of each of the Program Outcomes and Program Specific Outcomes is based
indicating the frequency with which these processes are carried out. Describe the assessment
processes that demonstrate the degree to which the Program Outcomes and Program Specific
Outcomes are attained and document the attainment levels)
12
3.3.2. Provide results of evaluation of each PO & PSO (65)
(The attainment levels by direct (student performance) and indirect (surveys) are to be
presented through Program level Course-PO&PSO matrices as indicated).
PO Attainment
C101
C102
C409
Direct
Attainment
Table B.3.3.2a
Survey PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 PO7 PO8 PO9 PO10 PO11 PO12
Survey 1
Survey 2
Survey 3
…..
Indirect
Attainment
Table B.3.3.2b
Note: Add more columns as needed for PSOs.
Mention the type of survey conducted and the location of its source
C101, C102 are indicative courses in the first year. Similarly, C409 is final year course. First
numeric digit indicates year of study and remaining two digits indicate course nos. in the
respective year of study.
 Direct attainment level of a PO/PSO is determined by taking average across all courses
addressing that PO/PSO.
 Indirect attainment level of a PO/PSO is determined based on the student exit surveys,
employer surveys, co-curricular activities, extracurricular activities etc.
13
CRITERION 4 Students’ Performance 100
(Information to be provided cumulatively for all the shifts with

explicit headings, wherever applicable)
Sanctioned intake of the program (N)
Total number of students admitted in first year minus number of students

migrated to other programs/institutions, plus no. of students migrated to
this program (N1)
Number of students admitted in 2nd year in the same batch via lateral
entry (N2)
Separate division students, if applicable (N3)
Total number of students admitted in the Program (N1 + N2 + N3)
Table B.4a
CAY – Current Academic Year

CAYm1- Current Academic Year minus1= Current Assessment Year
CAYm2 - Current Academic Year minus2=Current Assessment Year minus 1
LYG – Last Year Graduate minus 1
LYGm1 – Last Year Graduate minus 1
LYGm2 – Last Year Graduate minus 2
Year of entry N1 + N2 + N3
Number of students who have successfully
(As defined above)
graduated without backlogs in any
semester/year of study
(Without Backlog means no compartment
or failures in any semester/year of study)
I Year II Year III Year IV Year
CAY
CAYm1
CAYm2
CAYm3
CAYm4 (LYG)
CAYm5 (LYGm1)
CAYm6 (LYGm2)
Table B.4b
14
Number of students who have successfully
graduated
(As defined above) (Students with backlog in stipulated period
of study)
CAY
CAYm1
CAYm2
CAYm3
CAYm4 (LYG)
CAYm5 (LYGm1)
CAYm6 (LYGm2)
Table B.4c
For Example from data entry perspective:
Item
CAY CAYm1 CAYm2
(Information to be provided cumulatively for all the shifts (2016-17) (2015-16) (2014-15)
with explicit headings, wherever applicable)

120 120 120
Total number of students admitted in first year minus number of
students migrated to other programs/institutions plus no. of 100 100 110
students migrated to this program (N1)
Number of students admitted in 2nd year in the same batch via

Nil 24 24
lateral entry (N2)
Separate division (N3) Nil Nil Nil
Total number of students admitted in the Program (N1 + N2 + N3)

124 124 134
Number of students who have
(As defined above) successfully graduated without
backlogs in any semester/year of
study
CAY (2016-17) 100(100+00+0)
CAYm1 (2015-16) 124(100+24+0) 60
CAYm2 (2014-15) 124 (100+24+0) 50 40+20
15
CAYm3 (2013-14) 134 (110+24+0) 90 80+20 70+20
CAYm4 (LYG) (2012-13) 124 (100+24+0) 100 90+20 85+18 85+15
CAYm5 (LYGm1) (2011-12) 130 (120+10+0) 80 70+10 60+10 50+10
CAYm6 (LYGm2) (2010-11) 144 (120+24+0) 70 60+15 54+10 50+10
Year of entry N1 + N2 + N3 Number of students who have

successfully graduated
(As defined above)
(Students with backlog in stipulated

period of study)
CAY (2016-17) 100(100+0+0)
CAYm1 (2015-16) 124(100+24+0) 40
CAYm2 (2014-15) 124 (100+24+0) 50 45+4
CAYm3 (2013-14) 134 (110+24+0) 20 20+4 15+3
CAYm4 (LYG) (2012-13) 124 (100+24+0) 0 0+4 5+4 5+4
CAYm5 (LYGm1) (2011-12) 130 (120+10+0) 30 30+10 25+4 50+10
CAYm6 (LYGm2) (2010-11) 144 (120+24+0) 30 25+5 25+5 20+5
4.1. Enrolment Ratio (20)
Enrolment Ratio= N1/N
Item
(Students enrolled at the First Year Level on average basis during the previous Marks
three academic years starting from current academic year)
>=90% students enrolled 20
Otherwise 0
Table B.4.1
16
4.2. Success Rate in the stipulated period of the program (20)
4.2.1. Success rate without backlogs in any semester/year of study (15)
SI= (Number of students who have graduated from the program without backlog)/(Number of
students admitted in the first year of that batch and actually admitted in 2nd year via lateral
entry and separate division, if applicable)
Average SI = Mean of Success Index (SI) for past three batches
Success rate without backlogs in any semester/year of study = 15 × Average SI
Last Year of Last Year of Graduate Last Year of Graduate

Item
Graduate , LYG minus 1, LYGm1 minus 2, LYGm2
Number of students admitted in the

corresponding First Year + admitted in 2nd
year via lateral entry and separate division,
if applicable
Number of students who have graduated

without backlogs in the stipulated period
Success Index (SI)
Table B.4.2.1
4.2.2. Success rate with backlog in stipulated period of study (5)
SI= (Number of students who graduated from the program in the stipulated period of course
duration)/ (Number of students admitted in the first year of that batch and actually
admitted in 2nd year via lateral entry and separate division, if applicable)
Average SI = mean of Success Index (SI) for past three batches
Success rate = 5 × Average SI
Last Year of Last Year of

Last Year of
Graduate minus Graduate minus
Item Graduate, LYG
1, LYGm1 2, LYGm2
(CAYm4)
(CAYm5) (CAYm6)
Number of students admitted in the corresponding
First Year + admitted in 2nd year via lateral entry
and separate division, if applicable
Number of students who have graduated with

backlogs in the stipulated period
Success Index (SI)
Average Success Index
Table B.4.2.2
Note: If 100% students clear without any backlog then also total marks scored will be 20 as both 4.2.1 &
4.2.2 will be applicable simultaneously
17
4.3. Academic Performance in Second Year (10)
Academic Performance = Average API (Academic Performance Index), where
API = ((Mean of 2nd Year Grade Point Average of all successful Students on a 10 point scale) or
(Mean of the percentage of marks of all successful students in Second Year/10)) x (number of
successful students/number of students appeared in the examination)
Successful students are those who are permitted to proceed to the Third year.
Academic Performance CAYm1 CAYm2 CAYm3
Mean of CGPA or Mean Percentage of all successful students

(X)
Total no. of successful students (Y)
Total no. of students appeared in the examination (Z)
API = X* (Y/Z) AP1 AP2 AP3
Average API = (AP1 + AP2 + AP3)/3
Table B.4.3
4.4. Placement, Higher Studies and Entrepreneurship (30)
Assessment Points = 30 × average placement
Item CAYm1 CAYm2 CAYm3
Total No. of Final Year Students (N)
No. of students placed in companies or Government Sector (x)
No. of students admitted to higher studies with valid qualifying scores

(GATE or equivalent State or National Level Tests, GRE, GMAT etc.) (y)
No. of students turned entrepreneur in engineering/technology (z)
x+y+z=
Placement Index : (x + y + z )/N P1 P2 P3
Average placement= (P1 + P2 + P3)/3
Assessment Points = 30 × average placement
Table B.4.4
18
4.4a. Provide the placement data in the below mentioned format with the name of the program
and the assessment year:
Programs Name and Assessment Year

Name of the Appointment
Enrollment Name of the
S.no. student letter reference
no. Employer
placed no. with date
Table B.4.4a
4.5. Professional Activities (20)
4.5.1. Professional societies/chapters and organizing engineering events (5)
(The Department shall provide relevant details)
4.5.2. Publication of technical magazines, newsletters, etc. (5)
(The Department shall list the publications mentioned earlier along with the names of the
editors, publishers, etc.)
4.5.3 Participation in inter-institute events by students of the program of study (10)
(The Department shall provide a table indicating those publications, which received awards
in the events/conferences organized by other institutes)
19
CRITERION 5 Faculty Information and Contributions 200
Academic Research
(In case Currently Associated is (“No”)

Qualification
Association with the Institution
Professor/ Associate Professor
Date of Joining the Institution

Date on which Designated as
Name of the Faculty Member
Currently Associated (Y/N)

during the Assessment Years
Research Paper Publications
Nature of Association
(Regular/Contract)
Degree (highest degree)
Faculty Receiving Ph.D.
Date of Leaving
Year of attaining higher
Specialization
Department
Designation
Ph.D. Guidance
qualification
University
Table B.5
Note: Please provide details for the faculty of the department, cumulative information for all the shifts for
all academic years starting from current year in above format in Annexure - II.
5.1. Student-Faculty Ratio (SFR) (20)
(To be calculated at Department Level)

No. of UG Programs in the Department (n): __________
No. of PG Programs in the Department (m): __________
No. of Students in UG 2nd Year= u1
No. of Students in UG 3rd Year= u2
No. of Students in UG 4th Year= u3
No. of Students in PG 1st Year= p1
No. of Students in PG 2nd Year= p2
No. of Students = Sanctioned Intake + Actual admitted lateral entry students
(The above data to be provided considering all the UG and PG programs of the department)
S=Number of Students in the Department = UG1+UG2+UG3+PG1+PG2
F = Total Number of Faculty Members in the Department (excluding first year faculty)
Student Faculty Ratio (SFR) = S / F
20
Year CAY CAYm1 CAYm2
u1.1
u1.2
u1.3
UG1 u1.1+u1.2+u1.3 u1.1+u1.2+u1.3 u1.1+u1.2+u1.3
…
un.1
un.2
un.3
UGn un.1+un.2+un.3 un.1+un.2+un.3 un.1+un.2+un.3
p1.1
p1.2
PG1 p1.1+p1.2 p1.1+p1.2 p1.1+p1.2
…..
pm.1 pm.1+pm.2
pm.2
PGm pm.1+pm.2 pm.1+pm.2
UG1 + UG2 +.. UG1 + UG2 + ..
Total No. of Students in the UG1 + UG2 + .. +UGn
+UGn + PG1 + +UGn + PG1+…
Department (S) + PG1+… + PGm=S2
…PGm=S1 + PGm=S3
No. of Faculty in the
F1 F2 F3
Department (F)
Student Faculty Ration (SFR) SFR1=S1/F1 SFR2= S2/F2 SFR3= S3/F3
Average SFR SFR=(SFR1+SFR2+SFR3)/3

Table B.5.1
Marks to be given proportionally from a maximum of 20 to a minimum of 10 for average SFR between
15:1 to 25:1, and zero for average SFR higher than 25:1. Marks distribution is given as below:
< = 15 - 20 Marks
< = 17 - 18 Marks
< = 19 - 16 Marks
< = 21 - 14 Marks
< = 23 - 12 Marks
< = 25 - 10 Marks
> 25.0 - 0 Marks
Note:
Minimum 75% should be Regular/ full time faculty and the remaining shall be Contractual Faculty as
per AICTE norms and standards.
The contractual faculty (doing away with the terminology of visiting/adjunct faculty, whatsoever)
who have taught for 2 consecutive semesters in the corresponding academic year on full time basis
shall be considered for the purpose of calculation in the Student Faculty Ratio.
5.1.1. Provide the information about the regular and contractual faculty as per the format
mentioned below:
Total number of regular faculty in Total number of contractual

the department faculty in the department
CAY
CAYm1
CAYm2
Table 5.1.1
21
5.2. Faculty Cadre Proportion (20)
The reference Faculty cadre proportion is 1(F1):2(F2):6(F3)
F1: Number of Professors required = 1/9 x Number of Faculty required to comply with 20:1 Student-
Faculty ratio based on no. of students (N) as per 5.1
F2: Number of Associate Professors required = 2/9 x Number of Faculty required to comply with 20:1
Student-Faculty ratio based on no. of students (N) as per 5.1
F3: Number of Assistant Professors required = 6/9 x Number of Faculty required to comply with 20:1
Student-Faculty ratio based on no. of students (N) as per 5.1
Professors Associate Professors Assistant Professors

Year
Required F1 Available Required F2 Available Required F3 Available
CAY
CAYm1
CAYm2
Average
RF1= AF1= RF2= AF2= RF3= AF3=
Numbers
Table B.5.2
Cadre Ratio Marks= AF1 + AF2 x 0.6 + AF3 x 0.4 x 10

RF1 RF2 RF3
 If AF1 = AF2= 0 then zero marks
 Maximum marks to be limited if it exceeds 20
Example: Intake = 60 (i.e. total no. of students= 180); Required number of Faculty: 9; RF1= 1,
RF2=2 and RF3=6
Case 1: AF1/RF1= 1; AF2/RF2 = 1; AF3/RF3 = 1; Cadre proportion marks = (1+0.6+0.4) x 10 =

20
Case 2: AF1/RF1= 1; AF2/RF2 = 3/2; AF3/RF3 = 5/6; Cadre proportion marks = (1+0.9+0.3) x 10
= limited to 20
Case 3: AF1/RF1=0; AF2/RF2=1/2; AF3/RF3=8/6; Cadre proportion marks = (0+0.3+0.53) x 10 =

8.3
5.3. Faculty Qualification (20)
FQ = 2.0 x [(10X +4Y)/F)] where x is no. of regular faculty with Ph.D., Y is no. of regular faculty
with M. Tech., F is no. of regular faculty required to comply 20:1 Faculty Student ratio (no. of
faculty and no. of students required are to be calculated as per 5.1)
22
X Y F FQ = 2.0 x [(10X +4Y)/F)]
CAY
CAYm1
CAYm2
Average Assessment
Table B.5.3
5.4. Faculty Retention (10)
No. of regular faculty members in CAYm2= CAYm1= CAY=
Item
(% of faculty retained during the period of assessment keeping CAYm3 as Marks
base year)
>= 90% of required Faculty members retained during the period of 10

assessment keeping CAYm3 as base year
>=75% of required Faculty members retained during the period of 08

>= 60% of required Faculty members retained during the period of

06
>= 50% of required Faculty members retained during the period of

04
< 50% of required Faculty members retained during the period of assessment
0
keeping CAYm3 as base year
Table B.5.4
5.5. Faculty competencies in correlation to Program Specific Criteria (10)
(List the program specific criteria and the competencies (specialization, research publications,
course developments etc.,) of faculty to correlate the program specific criteria and competencies.)
5.6. Innovations by the Faculty in Teaching and Learning (10)
Innovations by the Faculty in teaching and learning shall be summarized as per the following
description.
Contributions to teaching and learning are activities that contribute to the improvement of student
learning. These activities may include innovations not limited to, use of ICT, instruction delivery,
instructional methods, assessment, evaluation and inclusive class rooms that lead to effective,
23
efficient and engaging instruction. Any contributions to teaching and learning should satisfy the
following criteria:
 The work must be made available on Institute website
 The work must be available for peer review and critique
 The work must be reproducible and developed further by other scholars
The department/institution may set up appropriate processes for making the contributions available
to the public, getting them reviewed and for rewarding. These may typically include statement of
clear goals, adequate preparation, use of appropriate methods, significance of results, effective
presentation and reflective critique
5.7. Faculty as participants in Faculty development/training activities/STTPs (15)
 A Faculty scores maximum five points for participation
 Participation in 2 to 5 days Faculty/ Faculty development program: 3 Points
 Participation >5 days Faculty/ Faculty development program: 5 points
Name of the Faculty Max. 5 per Faculty
CAYm1 CAYm2 CAYm3
Sum
RF= Number of Faculty required to comply

with 20:1 Student-Faculty ratio as per 5.1
Assessment = 3 × (Sum/0.5 RF)
(Marks limited to 15)
Average assessment over last three years (Marks limited to 15) =
Table B.5.7
5.8. Research and Development (75)
5.8.1. Academic Research (20)
Academic research includes research paper publications, Ph.D. guidance, and faculty receiving
Ph.D. during the assessment period.
 Number of quality publications in refereed/SCI Journals, citations, Books/Book Chapters etc. (15)
 Ph.D. guided /Ph.D. awarded during the assessment period while working in the institute (5)
24
All relevant details shall be mentioned.
5.8.2. Sponsored Research (20)
 Funded research from outside:

(Provide a list with Project Title, Funding Agency, Amount and Duration)
Funding Amount (Cumulative during CAYm1, CAYm2 and CAYm3):
Amount > 50 Lakh – 20 Marks,

Amount > 40 and < 50 Lakh – 15 Marks,
Amount < 15 Lakh – 0 Marks
5.8.3. Development activities (15)
Provide details:
 Product Development
 Research laboratories
 Instructional materials
 Working models/charts/monograms etc.
5.8.4. Consultancy (from Industry) (20)
(Provide a list with Project Title, Funding Agency, Amount and Duration)
Funding Amount (Cumulative during CAYm1, CAYm2 and CAYm3):

Amount >10 Lacs – 20 Marks,
Amount <10 and > 8 Lakh – 15 Marks,
Amount < 2 Lakh – 0 Mark
5.9. Faculty Performance Appraisal and Development System (FPADS) (10)
Faculty members of Higher Educational Institutions today have to perform a variety of tasks
pertaining to diverse roles. In addition to instruction, Faculty members need to innovate and conduct
research for their self-renewal, keep abreast with changes in technology, and develop expertise for
effective implementation of curricula. They are also expected to provide services to the industry and
community for understanding and contributing to the solution of real life problems in industry.
Another role relates to the shouldering of administrative responsibilities and co-operation with other
Faculty, Heads-of-Departments and the Head of Institute. An effective performance appraisal system
for Faculty is vital for optimizing the contribution of individual Faculty to institutional performance.
The assessment is based on:
 A well-defined system for faculty appraisal for all the assessment years (5)
 Its implementation and effectiveness (5)
25
5.10. Visiting/Adjunct/Emeritus Faculty etc. (10)
Adjunct faculty also includes Industry experts. Provide details of participation and contributions in
teaching and learning and /or research by visiting/adjunct/Emeritus faculty etc. for all the
assessment years:
 Provision of visiting/adjunct faculty (1)
 Minimum 50 hours per year interaction with adjunct faculty from industry/retired professors
etc.(9)
(Minimum 50 hours interaction in a year will result in 3 marks for that year; 3marks x 3years=
9marks)
26
CRITERION 6 Facilities and Technical Support 80
6.1 Adequate and well equipped laboratories, and technical manpower (40)
Weekly Technical Manpower support

utilization
No. of
status
Name of students Name of the
Sr. per setup (all the
No.
the Important
Laboratory equipment courses Name of the
(Batch technical Designation Qualification
for which
Size) staff
the lab is
utilized)
1.
N.
Table B.6.1
6.2. Laboratories maintenance and overall ambiance (10)
(Self-Explanatory)
6.3. Safety measures in laboratories (10)
Sr. No. Name of the Laboratory Safety measures
1.
N.
Table B.6.3
6.4. Project laboratory (20)
(Mention facilities & Utilization)
27
CRITERION 7 Continuous Improvement 75
7.1. Actions taken based on the results of evaluation of each of the COs, POs & PSOs (30)
Identify the areas of weaknesses in the program based on the analysis of evaluation of COs, POs &
PSOs attainment levels. Measures identified and implemented to improve POs& PSOs attainment
levels for the assessment year including curriculum intervention, pedagogical initiatives, support
system improvements, etc.
Actions to be written as per table in 3.3.2
Examples of analysis and proposed action Sample 1-Course outcomes for a laboratory course
did not measure up, as some of the lab equipment did not have the capability to do the needful (e.g.,
single trace oscilloscopes available where dual trace would have been better, or, non-availability of
some important support software etc.). Action taken-Equipment up-gradation was carried out (with
details of up-gradation)
Sample 2-In a course on EM theory student performance has been consistently low with respect to
some COs. Analysis of answer scripts and discussions with the students revealed that this could be
attributed to a weaker course on vector calculus.
Action taken-revision of the course syllabus was carried out (instructor/text book changed too has
been changed, when deemed appropriate).
Sample 3-In a course that had group projects it was determined that the expectations from this
course about PO3 (like: “to meet the specifications with consideration for the public health and
safety, and the cultural, societal, and environmental considerations”) were not realized as there were
no discussions about these aspects while planning and execution of the project. Action taken- Project
planning, monitoring and evaluation included in rubrics related to these aspects.
POs & PSOs Attainment Levels and Actions for improvement – CAY only
POs Target Attainment

Observations
Level Level
PO1: Statement as mentioned in Annexure I
PO1
Action 1:
Action N:
PO2:Statement as mentioned in Annexure I
PO2
Action 1:
Action N:
28
PO3
Action 1:
Action N:
PO4
Action 1:
Action N:
PO5
Action 1:
Action N:
PO6 :Statement as mentioned in Annexure I
PO6
Action 1:
Action N:
PO7
Action 1:
Action N:
PO8
Action 1:
Action N:
PO9
Action 1:
Action N:
29
PO10
Action 1:
Action N:
PO11
Action 1:
Action N:
PO12
Action 1:
Action N:
Similar information is to be provided for PSOs
Table B.7.1
7.2. Academic Audit and actions taken thereof during the period of Assessment (15)
(Academic Audit system/process and its implementation in relation to Continuous Improvement)
7.3. Improvement in Placement, Higher Studies and Entrepreneurship (10)
Assessment is based on improvement in:
 Placement: number, quality placement, core industry, pay packages etc.
 Higher studies: performance in GATE, GRE, GMAT, CAT etc., and admissions in premier
institutions
 Entrepreneurs
7.4. Improvement in the quality of students admitted to the program (20)
Assessment is based on improvement in terms of ranks/score in qualifying state level/national level

entrances tests, percentage marks in Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics in 12 th Standard and
percentage marks of the lateral entry students.
30
No. of Students admitted

National Level Entrance
Examination (Name of the Opening Score/Rank
Entrance Examination)
Closing Score/Rank
State/Institute/Level Entrance No. of Students admitted

Examination/Others
Opening Score/Rank
(Name of the Entrance
Examination) Closing Score/Rank
No. of Students admitted

Name of the Entrance
Examination for Lateral Entry or Opening Score/Rank
lateral entry details
Closing Score/Rank
Average CBSE/Any other Board Result of admitted students

(Physics, Chemistry & Mathematics)
Table B.7.4.
31
CRITERION 8 First Year Academics 50
8.1. First Year Student-Faculty Ratio (FYSFR) (5)
Data for first year courses to calculate the FYSFR:
Number of
Number of faculty
students *Assessment = (5 ×20)/
Year members (considering FYSFR
(approved intake FYSFR (Limited to Max. 5)
fractional load)
strength)
CAY
CAYm1
CAYm2
Average
Table B.8.1.
*Note: If FYSFR is greater than 25, then assessment equal to zero.
8.2. Qualification of Faculty Teaching First Year Common Courses (5)
Assessment of qualification = (5x +3y)/RF, x= Number of Regular Faculty with Ph.D., y = Number of
Regular Faculty with Post-graduate qualification RF= Number of faculty members required as per SFR
of 20:1, Faculty definition as defined in 5.1
Assessment of faculty
Year x Y RF
qualification (5x + 3y)/RF
CAY
CAYm1
CAYm2
Average Assessment
Table B.8.2
8.3. First Year Academic Performance (10)
Academic Performance = ((Mean of 1st Year Grade Point Average of all successful Students on a 10
point scale) or (Mean of the percentage of marks in First Year of all successful students/10)) x
(number of successful students/number of students appeared in the examination)
Successful students are those who are permitted to proceed to the second year.
32
8.4. Attainment of Course Outcomes of first year courses (10)
8.4.1. Describe the assessment processes used to gather the data upon which the
evaluation of Course Outcomes of first year is done (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.)
8.4.2. Record the attainment of Course Outcomes of all first year courses (5)
Program shall have set attainment levels for all first year courses.
(The attainment levels shall be set considering average performance levels in the
institution level 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 institution level
examination)
Refer to 3.1.1 for further details
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 (10)
The relevant program outcomes that are to be addressed at first year need to be identified
by the institution
Program Outcome attainment levels shall be set for all relevant POs and/or PSOs through
first year courses.
(Describe the assessment processes that demonstrate the degree to which the Program
Outcomes and Program Specific 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)
PO/PSO Attainment: Mention first year courses
Course
Title
C101
C102
Table B.8.5.1.
 Add more columns for PSOs if needed.
 If necessary present the table in Landscape format
33
8.5.2. Actions taken based on the results of evaluation of relevant POs and PSOs (10)
(The attainment levels by direct (student performance) are to be presented through Program
level Course-PO matrix as indicated)
PO Attainment Levels and Actions for improvement – CAY only – Mention for relevant POs
POs Target Attainment

Observations
Level Level
PO1
Action 1:
Action N:
PO2
Action 1:
Action N:
PO3
Action 1:
Action N:
PO4
Action 1:
Action N:
PO5
Action 1:
Action N:
PO6
Action 1:
Action N:
34
PO7
Action 1:
Action N:
PO8
Action 1:
Action N:
PO9
Action 1:
Action N:
PO10
Action 1:
Action N:
PO11
Action 1:
Action N:
PO12
Action 1:
Action N:
Table B.8.5.2
Write similar action statements for relevant PSOs
35
CRITERION 9 Student Support Systems 50
9.1 Mentoring system to help at individual level (5)
Type of mentoring: Professional guidance/career advancement/course work specific/laboratory

specific/all-round development. Number of faculty mentors: Number of students per mentor:
Frequency of meeting:
(The institution may report the details of the mentoring system that has been developed for the
students for various purposes and also state the efficacy of such system)
9.2. Feedback analysis and reward /corrective measures taken, if any (10)
Feedback collected for all courses: YES/NO; Specify the feedback collection process; Average
Percentage of students who participate; Specify the feedback analysis process; Basis of reward/
corrective measures, if any; Indices used for measuring quality of teaching& learning and summary of
the index values for all courses/teachers; Number of corrective actions taken.
9.3. Feedback on facilities (5)
Assessment is based on student feedback collection, analysis and corrective action taken.
9.4. Self-Learning (5)
(The institution needs to specify the facilities, materials and scope for self-learning / learning beyond
syllabus, Webinars, Podcast, MOOCs etc. and evaluate their effectiveness)
9.5. Career Guidance, Training, Placement (10)

(The institution may specify the facility, its management and its effectiveness for career guidance
including counseling for higher studies, campus placement support, industry interaction for
training/internship/placement, etc.)
9.6. Entrepreneurship Cell (5)
(The institution may describe the facility, its management and its effectiveness in encouraging
entrepreneurship and incubation) (Success stories for each of the assessment years are to be
mentioned)
9.7. Co-curricular and Extra-curricular Activities (10)
(The institution may specify the co-curricular and extra-curricular activities) (Quantify activities such
as NCC, NSS etc.)
36
Governance, Institutional Support and Financial
CRITERION 10 120
Resources
10.1. Organization, Governance and Transparency (55)
10.1.1. State the Vision and Mission of the Institute (5)

(Vision statement typically indicates aspirations and Mission statement states the broad
approach to achieve aspirations)
10.1.2. Availability of the Institutional Strategic Plan and its Effective Implementation
and Monitoring (25)
10.1.3. Governing body, administrative setup, functions of various bodies, service

rules, procedures, recruitment and promotional policies (10)
List the governing, senate, and all other academic and administrative bodies; their
memberships, functions, and responsibilities; frequency of the meetings; and
attendance therein, in a tabular form. A few sample minutes of the meetings and
action-taken reports should be annexed.
The published rules including service rules, policies and procedures; year of publication
shall be listed. Also state the extent of awareness among the employees/students.
10.1.4. Decentralization in working and grievance redressal mechanism (5)
List the names of the faculty members who have been delegated powers for taking
administrative decisions. Mention details in respect of decentralization in working.
Specify the mechanism and composition of grievance redressal cell including Anti
Ragging Committee & Sexual Harassment Committee.
10.1.5. Delegation of financial powers (5)
Institution should explicitly mention financial powers delegated to the Principal, Heads
of Departments and relevant in-charges. Demonstrate the utilization of financial powers
for each of the assessment years.
10.1.6. Transparency and availability of correct/unambiguous information in public

domain (5)
(Information on policies, rules, processes and dissemination of this information to

stakeholders is to be made available on the web site)
10.2. Budget Allocation, Utilization, and Public Accounting at Institute level (15)
Summary of current financial year’s budget and actual expenditure incurred (for the institution
exclusively) in the three previous financial years.
Total Income at Institute level: For CFY, CFYm1, CFYm2 & CFYm3
CFY: Current Financial Year – CFYm1 (Current Financial Year minus 1), CFYm2 (Current
Financial Year minus 2), CFYm3 (Current Financial Year minus 3)
37
For CFY
Total No. of
Actual expenditure in students
Total Income in CFY:
CFY (till …): in CFY:
Fee Govt. Grant(s) Other Recurring Non- Special Expenditure

Sources including recurring Projects/Any per student
Salaries other,
(specify)
specify
Table B.10.2a
Note: Similar tables are to be prepared for CFYm1, CFYm2 & CFYm3.
Actual
Actual Actual Actual
Budgeted expenses Budgeted Budgeted Budgeted
Items Expenses Expenses Expenses
in CFY in CFY in CFYm1 in CFYm2 in CFYm3
in CFYm1 in CFYm2 in CFYm3
(till …)
Infrastructure
Built-Up
Library
Laboratory
equipment
Laboratory
consumables
Teaching and
non-teaching
staff salary
Maintenance
and spares
R&D
Training and
Travel
38
Miscellaneous
expenses *
Others,
specify
Total
Table B.10.2b
* Items to be mentioned.
10.2.1. Adequacy of budget allocation (5)
(The institution needs to justify that the budget allocated over the years was adequate)
10.2.2. Utilization of allocated funds (5)
(The institution needs to state how the budget was utilized during the last three years)
10.2.3. Availability of the audited statements on the institute’s website (5)
(The institution needs to make audited statements available on its website)
10.3. Program Specific Budget Allocation, Utilization (30)
Total Budget at program level: For CFY, CFYm1, CFYm2 & CFYm3
CFY: Current Financial Year – CFYm1 (Current Financial Year minus 1) CFYm2 (Current
Financial Year minus 2) CFYm3 (Current Financial Year minus 3)
For CFY
Total No. of
Actual expenditure in students
Total Budget in CFY:
CFY (till …): in CFY:
Expenditure
Non recurring Recurring Non Recurring Recurring
per student
Table B.10.3a
39
Note: Similar tables are to be prepared for CFYm1, CFYm2 & CFYm3.
Actual
Actual Actual Actual
Budgeted expenses Budgeted Budgeted Budgeted
Items Expenses Expenses Expenses
in CFY in CFY (till in CFYm1 in CFYm2 in CFYm3
in CFYm1 in CFYm2 in CFYm3
…)
Laboratory
equipment
Software
Laboratory
consumable
Maintenance and
spares
R&D
Training and
Travel
Miscellaneous
expenses *
Total
Table B.10.3b
* Items to be mentioned.
10.3.1. Adequacy of budget allocation (10)
(Institution needs to justify that the budget allocated over the assessment years was
adequate for the program)
10.3.2. Utilization of allocated funds (20)
(Institution needs to state how the budget was utilized during the last three assessment
years)
10.4. Library and Internet (20)
(Indicate whether zero deficiency report was received by the Institution for all the assessment
years. Effective availability/purchase records and utilization of facilities/equipment etc. to be
documented and demonstrated)
40
10.4.1. Quality of learning resources (hard/soft) (10)
 Relevance of available learning resources including e-resources

 Accessibility to students
 Support to students for self-learning activities
10.4.2. Internet (10)

 Name of the Internet provider:
 Available bandwidth:
 Wi Fi availability:
 Internet access in labs, classrooms, library and offices of all Departments:
 Security arrangements
41
Declaration
The head of the institution needs to make a declaration as per the format given below:
I undertake that, the institution is well aware about the provisions in the NBA’s accreditation
manual concerned for this application, rules, regulations, notifications and NBA expert visit
guidelines in force as on date and the institute shall fully abide by them.
It is submitted that information provided in this Self-Assessment Report is factually correct. I

understand and agree that an appropriate disciplinary action against the Institute will be
initiated by the NBA in case any false statement/information is observed during pre-visit, visit,
post visit and subsequent to grant of accreditation.
Date: Signature & Name
Place: Head of the Institution with seal
42
ANNEXURE I
(A) PROGRAM OUTCOMES
Engineering Graduates will be able to:
1. Engineering knowledge: Apply the knowledge of mathematics, science, engineering fundamentals,

and an engineering specialization to the solution of complex engineering problems.
2. Problem analysis: Identify, formulate, review research literature, and analyze complex engineering
problems reaching substantiated conclusions using first principles of mathematics, natural sciences,
and engineering sciences.
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 the
public health and safety, and the cultural, societal, and environmental considerations.
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.
5. Modern tool usage: 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.
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.
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.
8. Ethics: Apply ethical principles and commit to professional ethics and responsibilities and norms of
the engineering practice.
9. Individual and team work: Function effectively as an individual, and as a member or leader in
diverse teams, and in multidisciplinary settings.
10. Communication: Communicate effectively 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.
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.
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.
(B) PROGRAM SPECIFIC OUTCOMES (PSOs)
Program should specify 2-4 program specific outcomes.
43
NATIONAL BOARD OF ACCREDITATION
Pro-forma for Pre-Qualifiers TIER-I Institutions
PARTA- Profile of the Institute
Name of the Program applied for:
A1. Name of the College:- Year of Establishment:-
Location of the College:-
A2. Address:- City:-
State:- Pin Code:-
Website:- E-mail:-
STD Code:- Phone No:-
Fax STD Code:- Fax:-
A3. Head of the Institution:-
Name:- Designation:-
Status of Appointment:-
A4. Contact details of Head of the Institution:-
STD Code:- Telephone No:-
Mobile:- E-mail:-
Fax STD Code:- Fax No:-
A5. Name of the Affiliating University:-
Address:- City:-
State:- Pin Code:-
Website:- E-mail:-
STD Code:- Phone No:-
Fax STD Code:- Fax:-
1
A6. Type of the Institution:
Institute of National Importance Autonomous

University Any other (Please specify)
Deemed University
Provide Details:
A7. Ownership Status:
Central Government Trust

State Government Society
Government Aided Section 25 Company
Self financing Any Other (Please specify)
Provide Details:
A8. Students Admissions (Institute level considering all UG programs):

Total
2017-18 2016-17 2015-16
Sanctioned intake
Number of students admitted
% of Students Admitted over last three assessment years

(Total Admitted/Sanctioned Intake )
Kindly note that the year mentioned here is exemplary, institute has to consider the academic years as per the definition of CAY
given in the document and according to the prevailing year.
Table A8.1
CAY: Current Academic Year
CAYm1: Current Academic Year minus 1= Current Assessment Year
CAYm2: Current Academic Year minus 2= Current Assessment Year minus1
A9. Campus Information:-
Does the College have its own building:-
Sports Complex:-
Canteen and Hostel (If any):-
Medical Room:-
Computer Laboratories:-
Counselling and guidance:-
Placement:-
2
A10. Names of programs offered by the College:-
UG:-
PG:-
Note: - Please mention department wise.
A11. Programs to be considered for Accreditation vide this application.
S. No. Program Name
Table A11
3
PART B- Program information as per point A11
(To be filled separately for all the programs applied for)
B1. Provide separate Information for each program applied for (including shifts if any):-
Name of Increase/d
the ecrease in
Name of Initial
program to intake, if Year AICTE
Name of the be Year any
Intake of Approval Accreditati
the program considered of
increa Letter on Status*
Department s Start (mention the
se No.
running No. of seats
increase/decre
ase)
Table B1
Note: Please mention all increase intake starting from the first increase for all programs
* Write applicable one:
 Applying first time

 Granted provisional accreditation for two/three years for the period(specify period)
 Granted accreditation for 5/ 6 years for the period (specify period)
 Not accredited (specify visit dates, year)
 Withdrawn (specify visit dates, year)
 Not eligible for accreditation
 Eligible but not applied
B2. Student Admissions (Program specific):-

Total
2017-18 2016-17 2015-14
Number of students admitted
% of Students Admitted over last three academic years
( Total Admitted/Sanctioned Intake )

Table B2.1
CAY: Current Academic Year

CAYm1: Current Academic Year minus 1= Current Assessment Year
CAYm2: Current Academic Year minus 2= Current Assessment Year minus1
4
B3. Information of Faculty
Please provide the list of faculty in the Department as per the below format separately
(year wise) for each year under consideration
Date on
which Date of
Area Nature of
Date Designate Currently Leaving
Quali of Desig Association
PAN of d as Associat (In case
S. No. Name ficati Speci natio (Regular/C
No. Joinin Professor ed Currently
on alizati n ontract/
g / (Y/N) Associated is
on Adjunct)
Associate “No”)
Professor
1.
..
N.
Table B3.1
B3.1. No. of the Available Faculty
Number of Faculty in the Department for both UG
S. No. Designation/Numbers and PG

CAY CAY
(2017-18) (2016-17)
1. Professor
2. Associate Professor
3. Assistant Professor
Number of Ph.D.*
4.
(as per the AICTE norms)
Table B3.1
*At least two Professors or one Professor and one Associate Professor should be available exclusively
for the department of the program under consideration
B3.2. Detail of Head of the Department for the program under consideration:
Name:-
Qualification:-
Ph.D.
Others
5
B4. Student Faculty Ratio (No. of Faculty as per the sanctioned intake):-
(To be calculated at Department Level)
No. of UG Programs in the Department (n): __________
No. of PG Programs in the Department (m): __________

No. of Students in UG 2nd Year= u1
No. of Students in UG 3rd Year= u2
No. of Students in UG 4th Year= u3
No. of Students in PG 1st Year= p1
No. of Students in PG 2nd Year= p2
No. of Students = Sanctioned Intake + Actual admitted lateral entry student
(The above data to be provided considering all the UG and PG programs of the department)
S=Number of Students in the Department = U1 + U2 + U3 + P1 + P2
F = Total Number of Faculty Members in the Department (excluding first year faculty)
Year CAY CAYm1 CAYm2

u1.1
u1.2
u1.3
UG1 u1.1+u1.2+u1.3 u1.1+u1.2+u1.3 u1.1+u1.2+u1.3
…
un.1
un.2
un.3
UGn un.1+un.2+un.3 un.1+un.2+un.3 un.1+un.2+un.3
p1.1
p1.2
PG1 p1.1+p1.2 p1.1+p1.2 p1.1+p1.2
…..
pm.1
pm.2
PGm pm.1+pm.2 pm.1+pm.2 pm.1+pm.2
Total No. of Students in the UG1 + UG2 +.. +UGn UG1 + UG2 + .. +UGn UG1 + UG2 + ..
Department (S) + PG1 +.. PGm + PG1+… + PGm +UGn + PG1+.. +
PGm
No. of Faculty in the F1 F2 F3
Department (F)
Student Faculty Ration (SFR) SFR1=S1/F1 SFR2= S2/F2 SFR3= S3/F3
Average SFR SFR=(SFR1+SFR2+SFR3)/3
Table B4.1
Note: Minimum 75% should be Regular/Full Time faculty and the remaining shall be Contractual
Faculty* as per AICTE norms and standards.
*The contractual faculty (doing away with the terminology of visiting/adjunct faculty,
whatsoever) who have taught for 2 consecutive semesters in the corresponding academic year
on full time basis shall be considered for the purpose of calculation in the Student Faculty
Ratio.
6
B5. Placement, Higher Studies and Entrepreneurship Ratio
Z=No. of students Placed +

No. of students admitted for Placement, Higher
higher studies with valid N= No. of Students Studies and
Year qualifying scores in GATE or appeared in final year Entrepreneurship
equivalent State or National examination Ratio
Level Tests , GRE, GMAT + (Z/N)
opted Entrepreneurship
CAYm1
CAYm2
CAYm3
Average Placement, Higher Studies and Entrepreneurship Ratio

Table B5.1
7
Compliance status to Pre-Visit Qualifiers
Compliance
Pre Visit Qualifiers Status
S.N. Current Status
Complied/Not
Complied
Essential qualifiers
1 Vision, Mission & PEOs
i. Are the Vision & Mission of the
Department stated in the Prospectus /
Website?
ii. Are the PEOs of the Program listed in the
Prospectus / Website?
2 Whether approval of the competent authority
(Approval of AICTE/ UGC/ BoG of
Universities/ Deemed Universities etc.) for
the programs under consideration has been
obtained for all the years including current
year
3 Whether admissions in the undergraduate
programs at the Institute level has been more
than or equal to 60% *
(average of the previous three academic years
including Current Academic Year)
4 Whether admissions in the undergraduate
programs under consideration has been more
than or equal to 60%** % Admission
(average of the previous three academic years
including Current Academic Year)
5 Whether faculty student ratio in the
department under consideration is better than
or equal to 1:25 averaged over previous three SFR
academic years including Current Academic
Year.
6 Whether at least two Professors or one
Professor and one Associate Professor on
regular basis with Ph.D. degree is available in
the respective Department for previous two
academic years including the Current
Academic Year.
7 Whether number of available PhDs in the
department is greater than or equal to 20% of
the required number of faculty averaged for
previous two academic years including
Current Academic Year.
8 Whether the Placement, Higher Studies and
Entrepreneurship ratio is greater than or
equal to 40%.
(average of the last three assessment years)
9
Whether two batches have passed out in the
programs under consideration
10
Whether HODs possess Ph.D. degrees for the
programs under consideration
8
Desirable parameters
1 Whether department has program
assessment and quality
improvement committee. If so, its
constitution and mandate.
2 Whether the departments under
consideration receives separately
earmarked funds for
i. Maintenance of
Laboratory/computational
facilities(recurring funds)
ii. Up-gradation of
laboratory/computation
facilities(non-recurring funds)
*Total number of students admitted in first year minus number of students migrated to other
institutions, plus the number of students migrated to this institution divided by the sanctioned intake.
**Total number of students admitted in first year in the respective program minus number of students
migrated to other programs/ institutions plus the number of students migrated to this program divided by
the sanctioned intake in the respective program.

NBA Handbook Tier 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

NBA Handbook Tier 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY

NBA HANDBOOK – Tier 1

Dr Narayana Swamy Ramaiah

National Board of Accreditation (NBA)

Accreditation serves to notify

Purpose of accreditation is NOT TO

 back on their strengths and weaknesses

 improvement in quality provisions

 Recognizes the achievements/innovations

Post 2013 Scenario

Present System of Engineering Education

What are Outcomes?

What is SAR (Self-Assessment Report?)

Program Educational Objectives

POs and PSOs

Vision and Mission

• Must follow from Vision and Mission of the Institute

• Must be shared with all stake holders!

• Better to avoid “flowery” phrases(generally):

– All round excellence …

• Must result from a well-defined and recorded process!

Vision and Mission – Validation process

Example: 2 Graduates of Mechanical engineering will be able to

PEO MISSION-1 MISSION-2 MISSION-3 MISSION- N

 M1, M2, and so on are elements of the Mission

Program Specific Outcomes (PSOs):

– Develop, test, and maintain Systems Software.

– Maintain legacy software systems

 ECE: (Stem as with POs)

 ME: (stem as with Pos)

Closing the Quality Loop

At PO, PSO Level:

Relation between the three domains

Attainment of Course Outcomes

CO1 Understand and distinguish the behavior of U

CO4 Assess Bending and shear stresses in Ap

CO6 Design simple power transmission shaft Ap

Attainment of COs of the Course

o Computation of indirect attainment of COs may turn out to be complex; the

Remember 0 20% 20% 15%

Understand 0 60% 40% 40%

Apply 100% 20% 40% 45%

Class average in CIE

CO2 1.5/2 4.8/10 0 0 6.3/12 = 52.5%

CO3 0.7/1 0 7.4/10 0 8.1/11= 73.6%

CO4 1.7/2 0 3.8/10 2.9/5 8.4/17= 49.4%

Setting CO Attainment Targets

CO Target (Class Average)

Computation of CO Direct Attainment in the course Strength of Materials

Attainment of CO in a course Strength of materials = Wt. of CIE x Attainment of CO as

CO CIE SEE Direct CO Attainment

CO2 6.3/12 = 52.5% 48% 49.8%

CO3 8.1/11= 73.6% 48% 58.24%

CO4 8.4/17= 49.4% 48% 48.56%

CO5 2.9/5= 58% 48% 52%

CO6 7.4/10= 74% 48% 58.4%

CO Attainment and Attainment Gap

Target CO Action proposed to bridge Modification of

Suitable action to be initiated to fill the gap

CO4 11.44% Same as above Same as above

CO5 8.00% Same as above Same as above

CO6 1.66% Same as above Same as above

COs-POs and PSOs

o Each Course addresses a sub-set of POs and PSOs to varying levels