Accreditation & Continuous Quality Improvement

OBE OUTCOMES & PROFILES

obe header

 

1. Introduction

This document serves as the main reference to list the main OBE outcomes and profiles at the School of Aerospace Engineering, USM. These lists are the:

  1. Program Educational Objectives (PEO)
  2. Program Outcomes (PO)
  3. Knowledge Profiles (KP)
  4. Range of Complex Engineering Problem (CP)
  5. Range of Complex Engineering Activities (CA)
  6. Learning Domains (LD)

The School’s PEO and PO have been established through a rigorous process involving key stakeholders (which include academic staffs, aerospace engineering industries, students, and parents). The process was initiated in 2005 and later reviewed and updated continually through a series of workshops and assessments over the years. Details of this process can be referred to in the School’s SAR Reporti.

The lists of KP, CP, and CA are obtained from the recent document in 2013 published by the International Engineering Allianceii (IEA) to update the criteria for engineering graduates as established in the Washington Accord. The list of LDs is based on the six categories of cognitive domain based on the revised Bloom’s Taxanomyiii, the five categories of the affective domain, and the six categories of the psychomotor domain. The affective and psychomotor domains are as described in the document by Wilsoniv.

2. Lists

2.1. Program Educational Objectives (PEO)

Our graduates are expected to achieve one or more of the following PEO within five years of graduation from our program:

  1. Excel in engineering practices in various industries.
  2. Establish themselves as leaders in their professional careers.
  3. Earn an advanced degree or professional certification.

2.2. Program Outcomes (PO)

The School’s PO is based on the effort and documentation for the previous EAC accreditation exercise in March 2015. These PO characterize the attributes of the School’s graduates, in accordance with the Graduate Attributes defined in the 2013 IEA document. The POs were reviewed and approved by the school board on 13 November 2013.

Table 1: Program Outcomes

 PO

 Category

 Description

 PO1

Engineering knowledge

Apply knowledge of mathematics, science and engineering fundamentals to solve complex engineering problems particularly in aerospace engineering.

 PO2

Problem Analysis

Identify, formulate and analyze complex engineering problems to the extent of obtaining meaningful conclusions using principles of mathematics, science and engineering.

 PO3

Designing Solutions

Design solutions for complex engineering problems and design systems, components or processes to within the prescribed specifications relevant to aerospace engineering with appropriate considerations for public health and safety, society and environmental impact.

 PO4

Investigation

Investigate complex aerospace engineering problems using research-based knowledge and research methods to provide justified conclusions.

 PO5

Modern Tool Usage

Create, select and apply appropriate techniques, resources, and modern engineering and computational tools to complex engineering activities with an understanding of the limitations.

 PO6

The Engineer and Society

Apply appropriate reasoning to assess contemporary societal, health, safety and legal issues to establish responsibilities relevant to professional engineering practice.

 PO7

Environment and Sustainability

Demonstrate the knowledge of and need for sustainable development in providing professional engineering solutions.

 PO8

Ethics

Apply ethical principles and commit to professional ethics and responsibilities and norms of engineering practice.

 PO9

Communication

Communicate effectively both orally and in writing on complex engineering activities with the engineering community and society.

 PO10

Individual and Team Work

Function successfully and efficiently as an individual, and as a member or leader in multi-disciplinary teams.

 PO11

Lifelong Learning

Recognize the need for, and is capable to undertake life-long learning in the broadest context of knowledge and technological change.

 PO12

Project Management and Finance

Apply knowledge and understanding of project management and finance to engineering projects.

 
 

2.3. Knowledge Profiles (KP)

The list of KP defines indicated volume of learning and attributes against which graduates must be able to perform. The list is used to extend and clarify the definition of the Graduate Attributes (see the PO list above). This list of KP extracted verbatim from the 2013 IEA document is:

Table 2: Knowledge Profiles

KP

 Category

 Description

KP1

Natural Sciences

A systematic, theory-based understanding of the natural sciences applicable to the discipline.

KP2

Mathematics

Conceptually-based mathematics, numerical analysis, statistics and formal aspects of computer and information science to support analysis and modelling applicable to the discipline.

KP3

Engineering Fundamentals

A systematic, theory-based formulation   of engineering fundamentals required in the engineering discipline.

KP4

Specialist Knowledge

Engineering specialist knowledge that provides theoretical frameworks and bodies of knowledge for the accepted practice areas in the engineering discipline; much is at the forefront of the discipline.

KP5

Engineering Design

Knowledge that supports engineering design in a practice area.

KP6

Engineering Practice

Knowledge of engineering practice (technology) in the practice areas in the engineering discipline.

KP7

Societal Roles

Comprehension of the role of engineering in society and identified issues in engineering practice in the discipline: ethics and the professional responsibility of an engineer to public safety; the impacts of engineering activity: economic, social, cultural, environmental and sustainability.

KP8

Research Literature

Engagement with selected knowledge in the research literature of the discipline.

 

2.4. Range of Complex Engineering Problem (CP)

The list of CP (see Table 3) clarifies the definition of Complex Engineering Problem by establishing seven range, or characteristics, of problem-solving. Based on this list of CP, the attributes of a Complex Engineering Problem is that it must have CP1 and some or all of CP2 to CP7.

Table 3: Complex Engineering Problem Profiles

 

 Description

CP1

Depth of knowledge required

Cannot be resolved without in-depth engineering knowledge at the level of one or more of KP3, KP4, KP5, KP6 or KP8 which allows a fundamentals-based, first principles analytical approach.

CP2

Range of conflicting requirements

Involve wide-ranging or conflicting technical, engineering and other issues.

CP3

Depth of analysis required

Have   no obvious solution   and require abstract  thinking, originality in analysis to formulate suitable models.

CP4

Familiarity of issues

Involve infrequently encountered issues.

CP5

The extent of applicable codes

Are outside problems encompassed by standards and codes of practice for professional engineering.

CP6

The extent of stakeholder involvement and conflicting requirements

Involve diverse groups of stakeholders with widely varying needs.

CP7

Interdependence

Are high-level problems including many component parts or subproblems.

 

2.5. Range of Complex Engineering Activities (CA)

There are five attributes of activities students can be involved in when solving Complex Engineering Problem, as defined in the 2013 IEA document for the Washington Accord graduates. A Complex Engineering Activity or Project is that which has some or all of the following attributes:

Table 4: Range of Complex Engineering Activities

 CA

 Attributes

 Description

CA1

Range of resources

Involve the use of diverse resources (and for this purpose resource includes people, money, equipment, materials, information and technologies).

CA2

Level of interactions

Require resolution of significant problems arising from interactions between wide-ranging or conflicting technical, engineering or other issues.

CA3

Innovation

Involve creative use of engineering principles and research-based knowledge in novel ways.

CA4

Consequences to society and the environment

Have significant consequences in a range of contexts, characterized by difficulty of prediction and mitigation.

CA5

Familiarity

Can extend beyond previous experiences by applying principles-based approaches.

 

2.6. Learning Domains (LD)

The LD is based on the three learning domains (cognitive, affective, psychomotor) and their categories. For the purpose of student assessment, these categories will be reclassified into twelve levels of LD. These levels are listed below:

Table 5: Six levels of the Cognitive Domain

LD

Category

Description

LD1

Remembering

Recognizing or recalling knowledge from memory. Remembering is when memory is used to produce definitions, facts, or lists, or recite or retrieve material.

LD2

Understanding

Constructing meaning from different types of functions be they have written or graphic messages activities like interpreting, exemplifying classifying, summarizing, inferring, comparing, and explaining.

LD3

Applying

Carrying out or using a procedure through executing, or implementing. Applying related and refers to situations where learned material is used through products like models, presentations, interviews or simulations.

LD4

Analyzing

Breaking material or concepts into parts, determining how the parts relate or interrelate to one another or to an overall structure or purpose. Mental actions included in this function are differentiating, organizing, and attributing, as well as being able to distinguish between the components or parts. When one is analyzing he/she can illustrate this mental function by creating spreadsheets, surveys, charts, or diagrams, or graphic representations.

LD5

Evaluating

Making judgments based on criteria and standards through checking and critiquing. Critiques, recommendations, and reports are some of the products that can be created to demonstrate the processes of evaluation. In the newer taxonomy evaluation comes before creating as it is often a necessary part of the precursory behaviour before creating something.

LD6

Creating

Putting elements together to form a coherent or functional whole; reorganizing elements into a new pattern or structure through generating, planning, or producing. Creating requires users to put parts together in a new way or synthesize parts into something new and different a new form or product. This process is the most difficult mental function in the new taxonomy.

 

Table 6: Three levels (based on the original five categories) of the Affective Domain

LD

Category

Description

LD7

Receiving

This refers to the learner’s sensitivity to the existence of stimuli – awareness, willingness to receive, or selected attention.

LD7

Responding

This refers to the learners’ active attention to stimuli and his/her motivation to learn – acquiescence, willing responses, or feelings of satisfaction.

LD8

Valuing

This refers to the learner’s beliefs and attitudes of worth – acceptance, preference, or commitment. An acceptance, preference, or commitment to value.

LD8

Organization

This refers to the learner’s internalization of values and beliefs involving (1) the conceptualization of values; and (2) the organization of a value system. As values or beliefs become internalized, the leaner organizes them according to priority.

LD9

Characterization

This refers to the learner’s highest of internalization and relates to behaviour that reflects (1) a generalized set of values; and (2) a characterization or a philosophy about life. At this level, the learner is capable of practising and acting on their values or beliefs.

 

Table 7: Three levels (based on the five original categories) of the Simpson’s Psychomotor Domain

LD

Category

Description

LD10

Perception

The ability to use sensory cues to guide motor activity. This ranges from sensory stimulation, through cue selection, to translation.

LD10

Set

Readiness to act. It includes mental, physical, and emotional sets. These three sets are dispositions that predetermine a person's response to different situations (sometimes called mindsets).

LD11

Guided Response

The early stages in learning a complex skill that includes imitation and trial and error. Adequacy of performance is achieved by practicing.

LD11

Mechanism

This is the intermediate stage in learning a complex skill. Learned responses have become habitual and the movements can be performed with some confidence and proficiency.

LD12

Complex / Overt Response

The skilful performance of motor acts that involve complex movement patterns. Proficiency is indicated by a quick, accurate, and highly coordinated performance, requiring a minimum of energy. This category includes performing without hesitation and automatic performance. For example, players often utter sounds of satisfaction or expletives as soon as they hit a tennis ball or throw a football because they can tell by the feel of the act what the result will produce.

LD12

Adaptation

Skills are well developed and the individual can modify movement patterns to fit special requirements.

LD12

Origination

Creating new movement patterns to fit a particular situation or specific problem. Learning outcomes emphasize creativity based on highly developed skills.

 
 
 

References

              i.Self Assessment Report (SAR) of Aerospace Engineering Programme, Universiti Sains Malaysia (2012)

             ii.Graduate Attributes and Professional Competencies (Version 3), International Engineering Alliance (2013)

             iii.David R. Krathwohl, A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy, Theory into Practice, 2002.

             iv.Leslie Owen Wilson, Three Domains of Learning – Cognitive, Affective, Psychomotor, http://thesecondprinciple.com/instructional-design/threedomainsoflearning/

 

Contact Us

School of Aerospace Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Engineering Campus,
14300 Nibong Tebal, Pulau Pinang, MALAYSIA

Main Office
Tel : +604-599 5901  |  Fax: +604-599 6911 
Dean
Tel: +604-599 5902
Assistant Registrar
Tel: +604-599 5967