The Evaluation Method of the CDIO Syllabus Achievements Based on the Examination Scoring Point

The Evaluation Method of the CDIO Syllabus Achievements Based on the Examination Scoring Point

B. Dai, W. Xu, B. Lan, T. Wang, Z. Han (2017).  The Evaluation Method of the CDIO Syllabus Achievements Based on the Examination Scoring Point. 17.

CDIO syllabus has built a clear, complete, systematic and detailed engineering education goal. The key to achieving this goal is to design curriculum system and course outline, implement course teaching, evaluate curriculum system and teaching effect, and promote curriculum system, course outline and course teaching continuously based on the evaluation results. Now the weakest link to implement this process is evaluation. Recent years, in universities from all over the world, a lot of work on curriculum system and teaching effect evaluation has been done based on the ideas of "student centered" and "outcomes-based Education (OBE)", etc. The quantitative evaluation based on course examination is supposed as one of the most important evaluation methods. However, there are still some problems in the achievement calculation, as follows: The relationship between the achievement calculation and course assessment has not been raveled out. The relationship between the achievement calculation of the graduates and courses has not been raveled out. The method achievement calculation is not perfect.

So, in this paper the graduation standards for CDIO syllabus have been formulated, evaluation method for graduation requirement achievements based on scoring points has been proposed, evaluation system for graduation requirement achievement has been constructed, and the whole evaluation for graduation requirement achievement has been explored and practiced in automation specialty.

In this paper, the relationship between the target achievement calculation and course examination are clearly analyzed. The calculation method of achievement evaluation and course examination results are not the same but closely related. Closely relationship is that the two methods are from examine data in teaching points, namely, scoring points, where the different is the way and the goal of calculation. The calculation of course scoring results uses the graduation standard as a whole goal. First, the scoring points of course examine results into examine scores, then to get overall performance. The all process is a examine of graduation standard overall goal, and no clear different of indicator points are calculated, so it leads to one course of one student correspondence to one average scores: allover scores. The calculation of achievement evaluation come from different indicator points, and the examination scoring points come from the different of achievements, so one examination step can results into some indicators of achievements, namely, one course of one student can correspond to more than one average score: different indicator points of achievements.

In this paper, we present an evaluation method of graduation requirement achievements based on the examination scoring points. It first calculated the achievements of scoring points, namely, the score divide the full score, then according to the course assessment of different examination step, weighted sum calculation of indicators point results into the achievements. Lastly, weighted accumulative calculation of curriculum system results into the achievements. As shown in figure 2. Special note that the score point should be evaluation of teaching points, and course teaching should be a decomposition of graduation standard indicators, so scoring point calculation is corresponding to the achievements of teaching points, this curriculum teaching process, curriculum design, curriculum system can effectively achieve the graduation requirements. To implement the achievement evaluation of graduation requirements, we constructed a standard evaluation system to decompose graduation requirements, design the teaching activities, calculate teaching activities achievements, continuously improve the teaching activities and show an evaluation mechanism of self-evaluation.

Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference in Calgary, Canada, June 18-22 2017

Authors (New): 
Bo Dai
Wenxing Xu
Bo Lan
Teng Wang
Zhansheng Han
Beijing Institute of Petrochemical Engineering, China
CDIO Syllabus
CDIO Standard 2
CDIO Standard 3
CDIO Standard 11
CDIO Standard 12
Spady W. Choosing Outcomes of Significance. Educational Leadership,1994,51( 6): 18–22. : 
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.: 
Murray V., Matsuno C., Montes H., Bejarano A., Proceedings from research as a new learning outcome in undergrad engineering programs, 2015 IEEE 7th International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED), Kanazawa, 17-18 Nov. 2015: 73 – 78.: 
Guo Shiqing, Zhuang Yu, Yan Wei, Exploration for colleges’ curriculum planning based on achievement oriented and curriculum map concept, Higher Education Forum, 2016,1: 60-63.: 
Makinda J.,Bolong N., Mirasa A.K and Ayog J.L., Assessing the Achievement of Program Outcome on Environment and Sustainability: A Case Study in Engineering Education, 2nd Regional Conference on Campus Sustainability: Capacity Building in Enhancing Campus Sustainability. Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia. 7th – 8th April 2015: 47-56: 
Zulfadli, OBE Measurement System in Malaysian Institute of Information Technology Universiti, Kuala Lumpur, 2014 5th International Conference on Intelligent Systems, Modelling and Simulation, Langkawi, 27-29 Jan. 2014: 12 – 17.: 
Dai B., Liu J., Ji W., Han Z., Liu H.,Meng B., Xu W., Exploration and practice of the CDIO engineering education reform control system, Proceedings of the 10th International CDIO Conference, Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain, June 16-19, 2014.: 
Li Zhiyi, Instructional design with the achievement oriented, Chinese University Teaching, 2015, 3: 32-39: 
Zhou Wei, Yan Xing-chun, Lin Li-hong, The Formulation, Implementation and Evaluation of Mechanical Engineering Students Graduation Requirements Based on Engineering Education Accreditation-Taking Chongqing University as an example, International Conference on Advanced Education Technology and Management Science (AETMS), Hong Kong, PEOPLES R CHINA, 01-02 Dec,2013,: 352-358.: 
Shao Hui, Chen Qun, Xu Shoukun, etc., Quantitative assessment for the graduation requirements achievement of safety engineering based on the perspective with follow-up educational idea, Journal of Changzhou University (SOCIAL SCIENCE EDITION), 2015, 16 (3): 114-117.: 
Ou Wei Ping, Ge Xiukun, Xing Zhixiang, Research on the evaluation system of graduation requirements achievement -- taking safety engineering accreditation as an example, Heilongjiang Education (Higher Education Research and Evaluation), 2015, 10: 4-5.: 
Go to top