Q. OBE process clearly determines-Course outcomes and Program Outcomes. Why not final outcomes in terms of jobs, start-ups or higher education ?
Ans It is about learning outcomes. If knowledge, skills and behaviour honed-in, rest should be a natural outcome of all of above. Moreover jobs are driven by market forces and other factors which may or may not be in the hands of institutions. The scope is thus limited and defined.
Q What’s the core purpose of determining levels (0 to 3) ? Why not class average percentage marks of a class ? Why can’t class average percentage of a written paper or assignment be compared with previous year’s class average?
Ans In the case of class average, again there would be a need to put class % in numerical bands for efficient calculation of POs. You will also be required to put a threshold % based on degree of course/assignment difficulty and compare with the previous batches. So, replacing % of students with % of class marks doesn’t make the process simpler. The NBA mandated process is so far cleaner in the sense that after a course is consistently delivered in level 3, all you need to do is to raise the existing threshold level.
Q. Can we introduce OBE in the second or later years of a given batch.
Ans NO. You won’t be able to arrive at the POs without certain courses already over.
Q Can Tier—1 HEIs print below the Marks list or certificate ‘the program’ NBA accredited?
Ans Not found mandated by NBA anywhere permitting this; though such a practice does exist in a few US universities under the Washington Accord.
Q. Why have OBE if the current exam system is not linked to it? Whose case does it serve?
Ans Exam ERP system or system driven by AI tools by using examination and teachers continuous assessment internal marks can be integrated to provide OBE process outputs in terms of course and program attainment levels. But it must serve the core purpose of OBE.
The test for a fit integration OBE process requires the statistics in arriving at the gaps in curriculum n’ teaching-learning. It requires to know if the rigour of assessment was ensured and evaluation conducted fairly throughout the years, where did the gap exist (if at all existed)? Was it owing to teacher’s incompetence ? Was it owing to students’ admissions of lessor merit ? Was it due to outdated or absence of students curriculum support systems, like labs or industry projects exposure? Or was that a course in the curriculum stood irrelevant, requiring removal? If there is positive movement forward, what are the factors contributing to the same? If your digitally smart system can provide all of above, fine or else continue to work on Excel Sheets till such competency is developed.
Q Do we need to switch over to some vendor providing OBE ?
Ans As long as HEIs are being visited by the peer teams for accreditations, you got to explain how did you set up outcomes and drew relevance matrix, set up every question according to CO and BT, worked out Levels and applied relevance factors. You can’t risk your accreditations by telling that a vendor/ERP did all, and I have little to say. I only gave the data. It would be a foolish act.
Good News The entire OBE process is very simple to handle between a course faculty and program coordinator. However basic understanding of the process is must. Once you do it by your hands on the laptop, it won’t look laborious. Trust me, in one full semester, a faculty might need max three to four-hour in total but in four to five intervals, at best in filling the excel sheets of marks and arriving at the levels. Program Coordinator would need just the same to compile all course attainments.
😁 A good HEI never documents it from the back date because it continuously implements the process
By Prof JR Sharma- the views are personal
