Diploma Engineering SAR
Diploma Engineering SAR
Diploma Engineering SAR
(January, 2019)
1
SAR Contents
2
PART A: Institutional Information
3. Year of Establishment:
University
Deemed University
Autonomous
Affiliated
5. Ownership Status:
Central Government
State Government
Government Aided
Self-financing
Trust
Society
Section 25 Company
Provide Details:
Year of
Name of the Institution Programs of Study Location
Establishment
3
7. Details of all the programs being offered by the institution under consideration:
1.
N.
1.
N.
1.
2.
N.
4
8. Total number of Employees:
A. Regular*Faculty and Staff:
M
Faculty in Engineering&
Technology
F
M
Faculty in Sciences
&Humanities F
M
Non-teaching staff
F
Note:
Minimum 75% should be Regular/Full Time faculty and the remaining shall be Contractual Faculty as
per AICTE norms and standards.
The contractual faculty (doing away with the terminology of visiting/adjunct faculty, whatsoever)
who have taught for 2 consecutive semesters in the corresponding academic year on full time basis
shall be considered for the purpose of calculation in the Student Faculty Ratio.
Note: In case Institution is running AICTE approved courses in Second shift, separate tables with the
relevant heading shall be prepared.
M
Faculty in Engineering&
Technology
F
M
Faculty in Sciences
&Humanities F
M
Non-teaching staff
F
5
9. Total number of students:
Note: In case Institution is running AICTE approved courses in Second shift, separate tables with
the relevant heading shall be prepared.
10. Contact Information of the Head of the Institution and NBA coordinator:
Name:
Designation:
Mobile No:
Email id:
Name:
Designation:
Mobile No:
Email id
6
Vision, Mission and Program Educational Objectives 50
CRITERION 1
1.1. State the Vision and Mission of the Department & Institution (05)
(Vision statement typically indicates aspirations and Mission statement states the broad approach to
achieve aspirations)
(Here Institute Vision and Mission statements have been asked to ensure consistency with the
department Vision and Mission statements; the assessment of the Institute Vision and Mission
will be done in the Criterion 9)
1.3. Indicate where and how the Vision, Mission and PEOs are published and
disseminated among stakeholders (10)
(Describe where (websites, curricula, posters etc.) the Vision, Mission and PEOs are published and
detail the process which ensures awareness among internal and external stakeholders with effective
process implementation)
(Internal Stakeholders may include Management, Governing Board Members, Faculty, Support
Staff, Students etc. and External Stakeholders may include Employers Industry, Alumni, Funding
Agencies, etc.)
1.4. State the process for defining the Vision and Mission of the Department, and
PEOs of the program (15)
(Articulate the process involved in defining the Vision and Mission of the department and PEOs
of the program)
PEO Statements M1 M2 …. Mn
PEO1:
PEO2:
PEO5:
M1, M2..Mn are distinct elements of Mission statement. Enter correlation levels 1, 2 or 3as
(High)
2.1.1. State the process used to identify extent of compliance of the curriculum for
attaining the Program Outcomes (POs) and Program Specific Outcomes (PSOs) as
mentioned in Annexure I. Also mention the identified curricula gaps, if any (25)
A. Process used to identify extent of compliance of curriculum for attaining POs & PSOs (15)
B. List the curricular gaps for the attainment of POs & PSOs (10)
Note: In case all POs and PSOs are being demonstrably met through Curriculum then 2.1.2 will not be
applicable and the weightage of 2.1.1 will be 40.
CAY
Relevanc
Date- Resource No. of
Action Mode e to
Month- Person with students
S.No. Gap taken POs&
Year designation present
PSOs
CAYm1
8
CAYm2
CAYm3
Note: Please mention in detail whether the Institution has given such inputs and suggestions to the
Affiliating Board regarding curricular gaps and possible addition of new content/add-on courses
in the curriculum, to bridge the gap and to improve/attain certain POs &
PSOs. (Institutions are also allowed to use MOOCs over SWAYAM portal)
2.2.1. Describe Processes followed to ensure/improve quality of Teaching & Learning based on
following points (25)
2.2.2. Initiatives to improve the quality of semester tests and assignments (15)
Initiatives to improve the quality of semester tests and assignments in terms of the following:
A. Process for Internal semester question paper setting and evaluation and effective process
implementation (5)
B. Question paper setting taking into account outcomes/learning levels (5)
C. COs coverage in class test / mid-term tests and assignments (5)
9
2.2.3. Quality of Experiments (15)
D. Industrial training/ internship (5) (Marks to be given proportionately i.e. 100% student attended =05 Marks;
90% students attended = 04, Marks and so on…)
2.2.6. Information Access Facilities and Student Centric Learning Initiatives (15)
A. Availability of facilities & Effective Utilization; specify the facilities, materials and scope for self-
learning, Webinars, NPTEL Podcast, MOOCs etc. (10)
B. Student Centric Learning Initiatives & Effective Implementation (05)
10
CRITERION 3
Course Outcomes and Program Outcomes 100
3.1. Establish the correlation between the courses and the POs & PSOs (20)
(POs as mentioned in Annexure I and PSOs as defined by the Program)
3.1.1. Course Outcomes (SAR should include course outcomes of one course from each
semester of study, however, should be prepared for all courses) (05)
Course Name: Ciii Year of Study: YYYY – YY; For ex. C202 Year of study 2013-14
C202.1 <Statement>
C202.. <Statement>
C202.N <Statement>
Table – 3.1.1
C202 is the second course in second year and „.1‟ to „.n‟ are the outcomes of this course.
3.1.3. CO-PO/PSO matrices of courses selected in 3.1.1 (six matrices to be mentioned; one
course per semester from 1st to 6th semester) (05)
CO PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 PO7 PSO1 PSO2 PSO..
C202.1
C202..
C202..N
C202
Table 3.1.2
Note:
11
3.1.4. Program level Course-PO/PSO matrix of all courses INCLUDING first year courses (10)
Course PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 PO7 PSO1 PSO2 PSO..
C101
C202
C303
….
….
Table 3.1.3*
Note:
3.2.1. Describe the assessment processes used to gather the data upon which the evaluation of
Course Outcome is based (10)
(Examples of data collection processes may include, but are not limited to, specific exam/tutorial questions,
assignments, laboratory tests, project evaluation, internally developed assessment exams, project
presentations, oral exams etc.)
3.2.2. Record the attainment of Course Outcomes of all courses with respect to set attainment
levels (30)
Target may be stated in terms of percentage of students getting more than the Board average marks or
more as selected by the Program in the final examination. For cases where the Board does not provide
useful indicators like average or median marks etc., the program may choose an attainment level on its own
with justification.
12
Example related to setting of the targets: (The examples indicated are for reference only.
Program may appropriately define levels)
Level 1: 60% students scoring more than board average percentage marks in the final
examination is considered to be attainment of Level “1”
Level 2: 70% students scoring more than board average percentage marks in the final
examination is considered to be attainment of Level “2
Level 3: 80% students scoring more than board average percentage marks in the final
examination is considered to be attainment of Level “3”
Program shall have set Course Outcome attainment levels for all courses.
(The attainment levels shall be set considering average performance levels in the board examination for the
assessment years. Attainment level is to be measured in terms of student performance in internal assessments
with respect the COs of a course plus the performance in the Board examination)
For Example:
If 75% students have scored more than board average percentage marks for CO C202.1 in the final
examination (average for last 3 years), then the set target level for that CO C202.1 will be 2.5 based on the
attainment level. Similarly, if the average marks for the CO C202.2 in the final examination (average for last 3
years) is 69%, then the target level will be 1.9
C202.1 2.5
C202.2 1.9
Table 3.2.2
Note: If the CO wise data is not available for the final examination then, target level will be the
same for all the COs of that course based on the total marks obtained in the final examination of
that course.
Target may be stated in terms of percentage of students getting more than class average marks or set by
the program in each of the associated COs in the assessment instruments (midterm tests, assignments, mini
projects, reports and presentations etc. as mapped with the COs)
Example
Mid-term test 1 addresses C202.1 and C202.2. Out of the maximum 20 marks for this test 12 marks are
associated with C202.1 and 8 marks are associated with C202.2.
Level 1: 60% students scoring more than 60% marks out of the relevant maximum marks is considered
to be attainment of Level “1”
Level 2: 70% students scoring more than 60% marks out of the relevant maximum marks is considered
to be attainment of Level “2”
Level 3: 80% students scoring more than 60% marks out of the relevant maximum marks is considered
13
to be attainment of Level “3”
Attainment is measured in terms of actual percentage of students getting set percentage of marks.
If targets are achieved then the C202.1 and C202.2 are attained for that year. Program is expected
to set higher targets for the following years as a part of continuous improvement.
If targets are not achieved the program should put in place an action plan to attain the target in
subsequent years.
Similar targets and achievement are to be stated for the other midterm tests/internal assessment
instruments
For example:
Assuming 60% weightage to Board examination and 40% weightage to Internal assessment, the
attainment calculations will be (60% of Board level) + (40% of Internal level ) i.e. 60% of 3 + 40% of
2 = 1.8 + 0.80 = 2.6
Note: Weightage of 60% to Board exams is only an example. Programs may decide their weightages
for Board exams and internal assessment with due justification.
3.3.1. Describe assessment tools and processes used for assessing the attainment of each
POs and PSOs as mentioned in Annexure 1 (10)
(Describe the assessment tools and processes used to gather the data upon which the evaluation of each
of the Program Outcome and Program Specific Outcome is based, indicating the frequency with which
these processes are carried out. Describe the assessment processes that demonstrate the degree to
which the Program Outcomes and Program Specific Outcomes are attained and document the attainment
levels)
Program shall set Program Outcome attainment levels for all POs & PSOs.
(The attainment levels by direct (student performance) and indirect (surveys) are to be presented
through Program level Course-PO matrix and course- PSO Matrix as indicated)
PO /PSO Attainment
Course PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 PO7 PSO1 PSO2 PSO..
C101
C102
14
…
….
….
C309
Direct Attainment
Indirect
Attainment
Table 3.3.2
C101, C102 are indicative courses in the first year. Similarly, C309 is final year course. First numeric
digit indicates year of study and remaining two digits indicate course nos. in the respective year of
study.
Direct attainment level of a PO is determined by taking average across all courses addressing that PO.
Fractional numbers may be used for example 1.55.
Indirect attainment level of a PO is determined based on the student exit surveys, employer surveys, co-
curricular activities, extracurricular activities etc.
Example:
1. It is assumed that a particular PO has been mapped to four courses C2O1, C3O2, C3O3,C3O4
2. The attainment level for each of the four courses will be as per the examples shown in 3.2.2
3. PO attainment level will be based on attainment levels of direct assessment and indirect assessment
4. From polytechnic perspective, it is assumed that while deciding on overall attainment level 80%
weightage may be given to direct assessment and 20% weightage to indirect assessment
through surveys from students, employers, co- curricular activities, extracurricular activities etc.
Direct Assessment
Attainment level will be summation of levels divided by no. of courses (3+2+1+3)/4= 9/4=2.25
Indirect Assessment
15
Assumed level - 2
PO Attainment level will be 80% of direct assessment + 20% of indirect assessment i.e. 1.8 + 0.4 =
2.2.
Level 4 – High
Level 3 – Medium
Level 2 – Low
16
CRITERION 4 Students’ Performance 200
Intake Information:
CAY
CAYm1
CAYm2 (LYG)
CAYm3 (LYGm1)
CAYm4 (LYGm2)
17
Number of students who have
successfully graduated (Students with
N1 + N2 + N3 backlog in stipulated period of study)
Year of entry (As defined above)
I Year II Year III Year
CAY
CAYm1
CAYm2 (LYG)
CAYm3 (LYGm1)
CAYm4 (LYGm2)
Item
(Students enrolled at the First Year Level on average basis during the previous Marks
three academic years including the current academic year)
20
>=90% Students
18
>=80% Students
16
>=70% Students
12
>=60% Students
08
>=50% Students
<50% Students 0
SI= (Number of students who have passed from the program without backlog)/ (Number of students
admitted in the first year of that batch plus actually admitted in 2nd year via lateral entry)
18
Last Year Graduate, Last Year Graduate Last Year Graduate
(LYG) Minus 1 Batch, Minus 2 Batch,
Item
(LYGm1) (LYGm2)
Average SI
SI= (Number of students who have passed from the program in the stipulated period of course
duration)/ (Number of students admitted in the first year of that batch plus actually admitted in 2nd
year via lateral entry)
Item Last Year Graduate, Last Year Graduate Last Year Graduate
(LYG) Minus 1 Batch, Minus 2 Batch,
(LYGm1) (LYGm2)
Average SI
Note: If 100% students clear without any backlog then also total marks scored will be 60 as both 4.2.1
& 4.2.2 will be applicable simultaneously.
19
4.3. Academic Performance in First Year (25)
API = ((Mean of 1st Year Grade Point Average of all successful Students on a 10 point scale) or (Mean of the
percentage of marks of all successful students in First Year/ 10)) x (successful students/number of students
appeared in the examination).
Successful students are those who are permitted to proceed to the second year.
API = ((Mean of 2ndYear Grade Point Average of all successful Students on a 10 point scale) or (Mean of the
percentage of marks of all successful students in Second Year/ 10)) x (successful students/number of
students appeared in the examination)
Successful students are those who are permitted to proceed to the final year
20
4.5 Academic Performance in Final Year (15)
API = (Mean of Final Year Grade Point Average of all successful Students on a 10 point scale) or (Mean
of the percentage of marks of all successful students in Final Year/10) x (successful students/number of
students appeared in the examination)
Successful students are those who passed in all the final year courses
21
4.6. a. Provide the placement data in the below mentioned format with the name of the program
and the assessment year (separately for CAYm1, CAYm2 and CAYm3):
Table B.4.6a
4.7.1 Professional societies / student chapters and organizing technical events (10)
(The Department shall list the publications mentioned earlier along with the names of the editors,
publishers, etc.)
A. Quality & Relevance of the contents and Print Material (3)
B. Participation of Students from the program (2)
4.7.3 Participation in inter-institute / state/national events by students of the program of study (05)
(The Department shall provide a table indicating participation, award, and recognition.)
22
CRITERION 5 Faculty Information and Contributions 150
Faculty Information:
institution
Faculty
Receivin
g
Research
M.Tech/
Paper
Ph.D.
Publicatio
a b c during
ns
the
Assessme
nt Year
Total
Note: Please provide the above table for the CAY, CAYm1, CAYm2 and CAYm3 where,
CAY – Current Academic Year
CAYm1- Current Academic Year minus1= Current Assessment Year
CAYm2 - Current Academic Year minus2=Current Assessment Year minus 1
CAYm3- Current Academic Year minus3=Current Assessment Year minus 2
b: Faculty serving this program from other Program / department considering fractional load
c: Faculty of this program serving other program/ department considering fractional load
23
Regular Faculty means:
Minimum 75% should be Regular/ full time faculty and the remaining shall be Contractual Faculty as per AICTE
norms and standards.
The contractual faculty (doing away with the terminology of visiting/adjunct faculty, whatsoever) who have
taught for 2 consecutive semesters in the corresponding academic year on full time basis shall be considered
for the purpose of calculation in the Student Faculty Ratio.
N=No. of students = Sanctioned Intake + Actually admitted lateral entry students
Year N F SFR=N/F
CAY
CAYm1
CAYm2
Average SFR
Marks to be given proportionally from a maximum of 25 to a minimum of 10 for average SFR between
25:1 to 30:1, and zero for average SFR higher than 30:1. Marks distribution is given as below:
< = 25 - 25 Marks
< = 26 - 22 Marks
< = 27 - 20 Marks
< = 28 - 15 Marks
< = 29 - 12 Marks
< = 30 - 10 Marks
> 30 - 0 Marks
5.1.1. Provide the information about the regular and contractual faculty as per the format mentioned
below:
CAY
CAYm1
CAYm2
Table 5.1.1
24
5.2. Faculty Qualification (25)
CAY
CAYm1
CAYm2
Average Assessment
Item Marks
>= 90% of required Faculties retained averaged over the period of assessment
20
keeping CAYm3 as base year
>= 75% of required Faculties retained averaged over the period of assessment
15
keeping CAYm3 as base year
>= 60% of required Faculties retained averaged over the period of assessment
10
keeping CAYm3 as base year
>= 50% of required Faculties retained averaged over the period of assessment
5
keeping CAYm3 as base year
25
Max. 5 per Faculty
Name of the Faculty
CAYm3 CAYm2 CAYm1
Sum
5.4. a. Organized/ Conducted FDPs and STTP by this department at State / National Level (12)
Minimum 2 days program
2 points per program (max. upto 12 marks)
Product development, Consultancy, Manufacturing contracts, Testing Contracts resulting into revenue
generation
An effective performance appraisal system for Faculty is vital for optimizing the contribution of individual
Faculty to institutional performance
26
CRITERION 6 Facilities And Technical Support 100
6.1. Availability of adequate, well-equipped classrooms to meet the curriculum requirements (10)
6.2. Availability of adequate and well-equipped workshops, Laboratories and Technical manpower to
meet the curriculum requirements (40)
A. Adequacy (10)
B. Quality of Labs/workshop (20)
C. Technical Manpower support –Eligible and Adequate (10)
1.
N.
6.3. Additional facilities created for improving the quality of learning experience in
laboratories (20)
A. Facilities (10)
B. Effective Utilization (05)
C. Relevance to POs/PSOs (05)
Areas in which
Sr.
Facility Name Details Reason(s) for Relevance to
No. Utilization expected to have
creating facility POs/PSOs
1.
N.
27
CRITERION 7 Continuous Improvement 75
7.1. Actions taken based on the results of evaluation of each of the POs & PSOs (25)
Identify the areas of weaknesses in the program based on the analysis of evaluation of POs &
PSOs attainment levels. Measures identified and implemented to improve POs & PSOs attainment
levels for the assessment years.
Sample 2-In a course on EM theory student performance has been consistently low with respect
to some COs. Analysis of answer scripts and discussions with the students revealed that this
could be attributed to a weaker course on vector calculus.
Action taken-revision of the course syllabus was carried out (instructor/text book changed too
has been changed, when deemed appropriate).
Sample 3-In a course that had group projects it was determined that the expectations from
this course about PO3 (like: “to meet the specifications with consideration for the public health and
safety, and the cultural, societal, and environmental considerations”) were not realized as there
were no discussions about these aspects while planning and execution of the project. Action
taken-Project planning, monitoring and evaluation included in rubrics related to these aspects.
POs & PSOs Attainment Levels and Actions for improvement – CAY
PO1
Action 1:
Action N:
PO2
Action 1:
Action N:
28
PO3: Statement as mentioned in Annexure I
PO3
Action 1:
Action N:
PO4
Action 1:
Action N:
PO5
Action 1:
Action N:
PO6
Action 1:
Action N:
PO7
Action 1:
Action N:
Similar information is to be provided for PSOs
29
7.2. Improvement in Success Index of Students without the backlog (10)
*Last year graduate and m1 & m2 indicate Minus one year and Minus 2 years
respectively
SI= (Number of students who have passed from the program in the stipulated period of course
duration)/(Number of students admitted in the first year of that batch and admitted in 2nd year via
lateral entry)
Assessment shall be based on improvement trends in success indices. Marks are awarded accordingly.
Academic Performance
Index (from criteria 4.3)
7.5. Internal Academic Audits to Review Complete Academics & to Implement Corrective Actions
on Continuous Basis (10)
Internal Academic
Audits
30
Institute Level Criteria
(The institution may report the details of the mentoring system that has been developed for
the students for various purposes and also state the efficacy of such system)
8.2. Feedback analysis and reward /corrective measures taken, if any (10)
A. Methodology being followed for feedback collection, analysis and its effectiveness (05)
B. Record of corrective measures taken (05)
Feedback collected for all courses: YES/NO; Specify the feedback collection process; Average
Percentage of students who participate; Specify the feedback analysis process; Basis of reward/
corrective measures, if any; Indices used for measuring quality of teaching & learning and summary
of the index values for all courses/teachers; Number of corrective actions taken.
(The institution may specify the facility, its management and its effectiveness for career guidance
including counseling for higher studies, campus placement support, industry interaction for
training/internship/placement, etc.)
A. Availability (01)
B. Management (02)
C. Effectiveness (02)
(The institution may describe the facility, its management and its effectiveness in encouraging
entrepreneurship and incubation) (Success stories for each of the assessment years are to be
mentioned)
31
Governance, Institutional Support and
CRITERION 9 75
Financial Resources
A. List the Governing Body Composition; their memberships, functions, and responsibilities (02)
B. Minutes of the meetings and action-taken reports (01)
C. The published service rules, policies and procedures with year of publication (01)
D. Extent of awareness among the employees/students (01)
A. List the names of the faculty members who have been delegated powers for taking administrative
decisions (02)
B. Specify the mechanism and composition of grievance redressal cell including Anti Ragging
Committee & Sexual Harassment Committee (03)
Institution should explicitly mention financial powers delegated to the Principal, Heads of
Departments and relevant in-charges.
(Information on the policies, rules, processes is to be made available on web site. Provision of
information in accordance with the Right to Information Act, 2005)
9.2. Budget Allocation, Utilization, and Public Accounting at Institute level (10)
Summary of current financial year’s budget and actual expenditure incurred (for the institution exclusively)
in the three previous financial years.
32
For CFYm1
Total No. of
Actual expenses in students in
Total Income in CFYm1: CFYm1
CFYm1:
1. Non recurring expenditure will include; not limited to; the following:
- Civil/Construction costs
- Equipment (laboratory/workshops/others)
- Capital items
- Maintenance cost
- Consumable materials
- Travel expenses
- Power expenses
- Security expenses
(The institution needs to justify that the budget allocated over the years was adequate)
(The institution needs to state how the budget was utilized during the last three years)
33
9.3 Department Specific Budget Allocation, Utilization (05)
Total Budget at Institute level: For CFY, CFYm1, CFYm2 & CFYm3
For CFY
Actual expenses in
Total Budget in CFY:
CFY (till …):
Note: Similar tables are to be prepared for CFYm1, CFYm2 & CFYm3.
CFY: Current Financial Year – CFYm1 (Current Financial Year minus 1) CFYm2 (Current Financial
Year minus 2)
(In this section, the institution needs to justify that the budget allocated over the assessment years
was adequate)
(In this section, the institution needs to state how the budget was utilized during the last three
assessment years)
(It is assumed that zero deficiency report was received by the institution, Effective availability and utilization
to be demonstrated)
34
9.5 Institutional Contribution to the Community Development/ Go-green (05)
9.6 Alumni Performance and Connect (10)
35
Declaration
The head of the institution needs to make a declaration as per the format given below:
I undertake that, the institution is well aware about the provisions in the NBA‟s accreditation manual
concerned for this application, rules, regulations, notifications and NBA expert visit guidelines in force as on
date and the institute shall fully abide by them.
It is submitted that information provided in this Self-Assessment Report is factually correct. I understand
and agree that an appropriate disciplinary action against the Institute will be initiated by the NBA in case
any false statement/information is observed during pre-visit, visit, post visit and subsequent to grant of
accreditation.
Date: Signature
Place: Name:
36
ANNEXURE 1
1. Basic and Discipline specific knowledge: Apply knowledge of basic mathematics, science and
engineering fundamentals and engineering specialization to solve the engineering problems.
2. Problem analysis: Identify and analyse well-defined engineering problems using codified standard
methods.
3. Design/ development of solutions: Design solutions for well-defined technical problems and assist
with the design of systems components or processes to meet specified needs.
[[[
4. Engineering Tools, Experimentation and Testing: Apply modern engineering tools and
appropriate technique to conduct standard tests and measurements.
7. Life-long learning: Ability to analyse individual needs and engage in updating in the context of
technological changes.
37