THE EVALUATION METHOD OF ABILITY ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS IN A CDIO SYSLLABUS

THE EVALUATION METHOD OF ABILITY ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS IN A CDIO SYSLLABUS

H. Shen, F. Gao, L. Liu, E. Ju, X. Han (2018).  THE EVALUATION METHOD OF ABILITY ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS IN A CDIO SYSLLABUS. 16.

As engineering education has continued to improve, more colleges and universities have adopted the CDIO engineering education model for the development of course majors and project design ,which has improved the engineering skills of their students. However, there are few reports in the literature of the research and development of methods used to evaluate the levels of skills achievement in engineering. . Measurement of the effectiveness and achievement of an engineering education can be determined by a scientific evaluation using the engineering education reform. Therefore, determining the best method for guiding the evaluation of teaching techniques and exploring methods for evaluating levels of engineering ability are of very significant in understanding and implementing CDIO education and teaching reform. In our CDIO syllabus the capabilities of engineering students can be classified into four categories, basic engineering knowledge, personal ability, teamwork and engineering system capability. In this reported study, an artificial intelligent model car project was used as an example to demonstrate how these engineering capabilities are achieved during the process of principle analysis, abstract modeling, plan design, intelligent car platform construction, debugging and operation among others. Measurement standards and scoring systems were established for each stage of the practice process. The evaluation methods were operational and quantifiable throughout the entire practice process and they ultimately ensured an overall improvement in the outcome of the practice of engineering design. 

Authors (New): 
Hua Shen
Fei Gao
Long Liu
Ernan Ju
Xue Han
Pages: 
16
Affiliations: 
Dalian Neusoft University of Information, China
Keywords: 
Evaluation methods
Ability achievement levels
Intelligent model car project
CDIO Syllabus
CDIO Standard 2
CDIO Standard 7
CDIO Standard 11
Year: 
2018
Reference: 
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P., The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action, Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press, 1996: 
Spady W., Choosing Outcomes of Significance. Educational Leadership, 1994, 51( 6): 18–22.: 
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), Evaluation Criteria 2000 (1994), http://www.abet.org/: 
Husna Z. A., Norlaila O., Hadzli H., Mohd F. A. L., Muhammad M. O., Outcome Based Education Performance Evaluation on Electrical Engineering laboratory module, 2009 International Conference on Engineering Education (lCEED 2009), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia December 7-8, 2009: 153-158.: 
Vijayalakshmi M., Desai P. D., G. H. Joshi, Outcome based education performance evaluation of capstone project using assessment rubrics and matrix, 2013 IEEE International Conference in MOOC Innovation and Technology in Education (MITE), 2013: 6-10.: 
Wen, T., The Exploration and Practice of Integrated Talents Nurturing Model based on CDIO, Proc. of ICED ’01, v. 1, Glasgow, 2012: 283-290.: 
Gu, P. et al., CDIO in China, Higher Engineering Education Research, 2012 (5): 34-45.: 
Go to top
randomness