Outcomes-Based Education (OBE) Framework of the
College of Engineering and Information Technology
Caraga State University

Background

The Commission of Higher Education (CHED) Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 37, Series of 2012 requires Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) offering engineering programs in the Philippines to establish an outcomes-based education (OBE) system to meet the demands of global equivalency of quality standards as well as to promote continuous quality improvement in HEIs offering said programs[1]. This requirement echoes the Washington Accord (WA) of 1989 prescribing undergraduate engineering program to be in OBE as one of the requirements for international accreditation of the engineering programs and international recognition of the graduates of these programs[2]. The WA is a multi-lateral agreement between bodies responsible for accreditation or recognition of tertiary-level engineering qualifications within their jurisdictions who have chosen to work collectively to assist the mobility of professional engineers[3].

The OBE System’s ultimate goal is for HEIs with accredited programs to demonstrate that their graduates have met an acceptable level of knowledge, skills, and attitude demanded by their different field of practices. It also demands that program outcomes must be aligned with the HEI’s mission and the programs’ educational objectives¹. It must also be supported by a continuous quality improvement program.

In compliance to CMO 37 Series of 2012, the College of Engineering and Information Technology (CEIT) of Caraga State University started adopting the OBE system in the implementation of its four engineering programs, namely BS Agricultural Engineering, BS Electronics Engineering, BS Geodetic Engineering, and BS Mining Engineering.

CEIT’s OBE Framework

CEIT’s framework for Outcomes-based Education (Figure 1) is loosely adapted and a slightly-modified version of a framework earlier presented by Oreta and Roxas (2012)[1]. It highlights OBE as a continuous process of education wherein the quality of the institution, program, curriculum, strategies for learning and teaching, and tools for assessment are improved continuously. The framework can be used as a guide to ensure that all academic activities will contribute towards the development of effective graduates, i.e., everything is clearly focused and organized around what is essential for all students to be able to do successfully at the end of their learning experiences.

The framework’s implementation starts with defining the desired ‘Outcomes’ at various levels (institutional, program, student, course outcomes) through a periodic dialogue, assessment and evaluation by various constituencies that includes the Program Advisory Panel, Faculty members, students, alumni, and stakeholders from the industry and professional bodies and organizations.

[1] CHED Memorandum Order (COM) No. 37, Series of 2012. Available online at http://www.ched.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/CMO-No.37-s2012.pdf
[1] OBE Framework, CBSUA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING OUTCOME-BASED EDUCATION, http://cbsua.edu.ph/index.php/site/post/707?sid=68
[1] The Washington Accord, http://www.ieagreements.org/accords/washington/
[1] Oreta, A.W.C and Roxas, C.L.C., 2012. Implementing an outcomes-based education framework in the teaching of engineering mechanics (statics). International Conference on Civil Engineering Education (ICCEE2012), 9-10 November, De La Salle University, Manila, Philippines. Available online at https://www.scribd.com/doc/114265334/IMPLEMENTING-AN-OUTCOMES-BASED-EDUCATION-FRAMEWORK-IN-THE-TEACHING-OF-ENGINEERING-MECHANICS-STATICS

First, the Expected Graduate Attributes (EGAs[1]) for each of the program are identified through critical analysis of CSU’s Mission and Vision by the various constituencies. Once these EGAs are identified and found coherent to CSU’s Vision and Mission, each program will then define the Program Educational Objectives (PEOs[2]) such that each of the EGAs is addressed. Since PEOs are based on the needs of the program’s constituencies and must be coherent with CSU’s mission and vision, periodic discussion, assessment and evaluation are crucial for continuous improvement. The PEOs will then be used to define the Program Outcomes (or sometimes called Student Outcomes (POs/SOs) which are narrow statements that describe outcomes (e.g., knowledge, skills, abilities, values) of what students are expected to know and be able to do by the time of graduation. In defining the POs, stakeholders' requirements and industrial needs must be considered including faculty expertise, CHED requirements, and requirements of Professional Bodies and organizations. This will ensure that the POs are consistent with the PEOs.

The Curriculum and Courses for each program are then planned, designed and mapped taking into account the desired top-level outcomes (EGAs, PEOs, POs). To assure achievement of these outcomes, the Learning Outcomes for each Course (CLOs) must be aligned with specific EGAs and POs.

To achieve the CLOs, planning and delivery of courses are aligned with the principles of Outcomes-based Teaching and Learning (OBTL). Such principles must be reflected in the course syllabus, teaching methods, learning activities and assessment tools. The course syllabus shall reveal that the CLOs are aligned with the EGAs, PEOs and SOs. It must also reflect OBTL activities and strategies for achieving the outcomes, as well as for measuring the outcomes.

In OBE, assessment of achievement of outcomes is compulsory. Because desired outcomes are defined from top to bottom (EGAs à PEOs à SOs à CLOs), the assessment will be carried out from bottom to top since achievement of bottom level outcomes will determine if the top level outcomes can also be achieved. Thus, assessment of achievement of outcomes in the course level must be carried out first to evaluate how effective are the course syllabus, teaching methods, learning activities and assessment tools. The results of the assessment are evaluated and analyzed for continuous quality improvement (CQI) at the course level wherein necessary changes or adjustments at the course level must be implemented.

Program assessment will then follow to measure the achievement of EGAs and SOs. This assessment will utilize the results of the course level assessment. Similarly, for continuous quality improvement (CQI), necessary changes or adjustments at the program level must be implemented at the program level based on the results of the assessment and analysis. Institutional assessment follows after the program assessment to measure the achievement of the PEOs where revision or improvements must be implemented, ensuring continuous quality improvement at the institutional level.