Call for Paper

CAE solicits original research papers for the October 2021 Edition. Last date of manuscript submission is September 30, 2021.

Read More

Impact of Advance Pedagogy in Engineering and Outcome based Education

Sumit Das, S. Biswas, Aniruddha Biswas. Published in Information Sciences.

Communications on Applied Electronics
Year of Publication: 2017
Publisher: Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Authors: Sumit Das, S. Biswas, Aniruddha Biswas
10.5120/cae2017652537

Sumit Das, S Biswas and Aniruddha Biswas. Impact of Advance Pedagogy in Engineering and Outcome based Education. Communications on Applied Electronics 6(8):22-27, March 2017. BibTeX

@article{10.5120/cae2017652537,
	author = {Sumit Das and S. Biswas and Aniruddha Biswas},
	title = {Impact of Advance Pedagogy in Engineering and Outcome based Education},
	journal = {Communications on Applied Electronics},
	issue_date = {March 2017},
	volume = {6},
	number = {8},
	month = {Mar},
	year = {2017},
	issn = {2394-4714},
	pages = {22-27},
	numpages = {6},
	url = {http://www.caeaccess.org/archives/volume6/number8/713-2017652537},
	doi = {10.5120/cae2017652537},
	publisher = {Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA},
	address = {New York, USA}
}

Abstract

In this paper, Engineering and Technological Education have been analyzed by the impact of Engineering Pedagogy and Outcome Base Education (EPOBE).To attract more youthful people into engineering and ensure that they are well equipped to meet future professional challenges, we have to know how successful engineers reflect and proceed when they are faced with challenging problems. The speculation is that, using a mixed (EPOBE) methods approach, where, we investigate and analyze how Engineering Pedagogy (EP) and OBE can be attenuated novice learner in engineering and technological education. It concludes by outlining future research to validate the habits of EPOBE approach in Engineering and Outcome Based Education (OBE) as well as to examine the internal changes in the learner.

References

  1. C. J. Atman and I. Nair, Engineering in Context: An Empirical Study of Freshmen Students’ Conceptual Frameworks. J. of Eng. Educ., 85(4), 1996, pp. 317–326.
  2. D. Kilgore, C. J. Atman, K. Yasuhara, T. J. Barker and A. Morozov, Considering Context: A Study of First-Year Engineering Students. J. of Eng. Educ., 96(4), 2007, pp. 321–334.
  3. M. E. Cardella, C. J. Atman and R. S. Adams, Mapping Between Design Activities and External Representations for Engineering Student Designers. Design Studies, 27(1), 2006, pp. 5–24.
  4. C. J. Atman, J. R. Chimka, K. M. Bursic and H. L. Nachtmann, A Comparison of Freshman and Senior Engineering Design Processes. Design Studies, 20(2), 1999, pp. 131–152.
  5. C. J. Atman, R. S. Adams, M. E. Cardella, J. Turns, S. Mosborg, and J. Saleem. Engineering Design Processes: A Comparison of Students and Expert Practitioners. J. of Eng. Educ., 96(4), 2007, pp. 359–380.
  6. S. Mosborg, M. E. Cardella, J. J. Saleem, C. J. Atman, R. S. Adams, J. Turns and K. Deibel, Engineering Design Expertise Study, CELT Technical Report. CELT-06–01, Seattle, WA: Center for Engineering Learning and Teaching, University of Washington, 2006.
  7. C. J. Atman and J. Turns, Studying Engineering Design Learning: Four Verbal Protocol Studies, Design Knowing and Learning: Cognition in Design Education, Amsterdam; New York, 2001, pp. 14–37.
  8. J. Turns, R. S. Adams, A. Linse, J. Martin and C. J. Atman, Bridging from Research to Teaching in Undergraduate Engineering Design Education. I. J. of Eng. Educ., 20(3), 2004, pp. 379–390.
  9. www.mun.ca/engineering/undergrad/graduateattributes.pdf”
  10. “A Framework for Quality K-12 Engineering Education: Research and evelopment”,Tamara J. Moore, Aran W. Glancy, Kristina M. Tank, Jennifer A. Kersten, and Karl A. Smith, Micah S. Stohlmann ,Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research 4:1 (2014) 1–13
  11. ”www.google.co.in/search?q=outcome+based+framework&biw=1252&bih=578&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjeuJS06sPOAhUFKo8KHWDMDqsQ_AUIBigB#imgrc=4UmtEt43BJyX8M%3A”
  12. Michael Derntl1, Susanne Neumann2, Petra Oberhuemer2 ,” Aligning Assessment with Learning Outcomes in Outcome-based Education”, /10/$25.00 ©2010 IEEE April 14 - 16, 2009, Madrid, SPAIN IEEE EDUCON Education Engineering 2010 – The Future of Global Learning Engineering Education Session T1A Page 1
  13. Gary K. W. Wong, H. Y. Cheung, “Outcome-Based Teaching and Learning in Computer Science Education at Sub-degree Level”, International Journal of Information and Education Technology, Vol. 1, No. 1, April 2011, ISSN: 2010-3689.
  14. Chandra R. Sekhar, Omer Farook and Essaid Bouktache, “Continuous Improvement Process Based on Outcome Based Education”, Proceedings of The 2008 IAJC-IJME International Conference ISBN 978-1-60643-379-9.
  15. Liliya Akhmadeeva, Maureen Hindy, Carolyn J. Sparrey, “Overcoming Obstacles To Implementing An Outcome-Based Education Model: Traditional Versus Transformational Obe” ,Proc. 2013 Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA13) Conf., CEEA13; Paper 145 Montreal, QC; June 17-20, 2013 – 1 of 5
  16. SujataWadhwa, Audrey Barlow, Siddharthsinh Jadeja, “Activity Based Learning: Overcoming problems in implementing OBE in Engineering Education during transition phase.”, 43rd Annual SEFI Conference June 29 - July 2, 2015Orléans, France
  17. https://www.ied.edu.hk/obl/files/pratical_guide_5.pdf
  18. https://tlc.iitm.ac.in/PDF/Blooms%20Tax.pdf
  19. https://www.nescent.org/eog/documents/IntrotoActiveLearning.ppt
  20. https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/pedagogic_research_guide_final_version_0.
  21. https://www.scholarworks.montana.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1/1790/MarloweC0812.pdf?

Keywords

Engineering Pedagogy and Outcome Base Education (EPOBE), Engineering Pedagogy (EP), Advance Pedagogy (AP), Outcome Based Deliverable Content (OBDC), FLPI-Learning.