工程毕业生属性成就度量模型

L. Ngu, Charlie ChinVoon Sia, Ming-kwan Lee, Rajeswari Lakshmanan, JiaChi Lai, T. Ling
{"title":"工程毕业生属性成就度量模型","authors":"L. Ngu, Charlie ChinVoon Sia, Ming-kwan Lee, Rajeswari Lakshmanan, JiaChi Lai, T. Ling","doi":"10.1080/22054952.2022.2162672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Various outcome-based education (OBE) performance measurement approaches demonstrate students’ attainment of a set of Graduate Attributes (GA) in the engineering programme. This paper presents four measurement models, namely the indicative, explicit, GA assessment, and culminating models, to measure GA attainment. The indicative model uses the total assessment mark as an indicator for GA attainment, whereas the explicit model utilises a specific mark from an assessment. The GA assessment and culminating models utilise the explicit approach from assessments that fulfil the GA requirement. The culminating model only consists of assessments from advanced and capstone courses. This research aims to determine whether the indicative model that uses an indicator approach can significantly represent GA attainment. This research also explores assessment selection differences in GA attainment. Statistical analysis was used to determine if the models were significantly different through the paired two-sample means t-test. The indicative model could not represent the GA attainment as it differed substantially from the explicit model. Both GA assessment and culminating models can be used to represent the attainment of students’ GA. GA assessment model provides monitoring of students’ progress in GA attainment, while the culminating models enable measurement at capstones and in advanced years.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Engineering graduate attribute attainment measurement models\",\"authors\":\"L. Ngu, Charlie ChinVoon Sia, Ming-kwan Lee, Rajeswari Lakshmanan, JiaChi Lai, T. Ling\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/22054952.2022.2162672\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Various outcome-based education (OBE) performance measurement approaches demonstrate students’ attainment of a set of Graduate Attributes (GA) in the engineering programme. This paper presents four measurement models, namely the indicative, explicit, GA assessment, and culminating models, to measure GA attainment. The indicative model uses the total assessment mark as an indicator for GA attainment, whereas the explicit model utilises a specific mark from an assessment. The GA assessment and culminating models utilise the explicit approach from assessments that fulfil the GA requirement. The culminating model only consists of assessments from advanced and capstone courses. This research aims to determine whether the indicative model that uses an indicator approach can significantly represent GA attainment. This research also explores assessment selection differences in GA attainment. Statistical analysis was used to determine if the models were significantly different through the paired two-sample means t-test. The indicative model could not represent the GA attainment as it differed substantially from the explicit model. Both GA assessment and culminating models can be used to represent the attainment of students’ GA. GA assessment model provides monitoring of students’ progress in GA attainment, while the culminating models enable measurement at capstones and in advanced years.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38191,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/22054952.2022.2162672\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/22054952.2022.2162672","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

各种基于结果的教育(OBE)绩效测量方法展示了学生在工程课程中获得的一组研究生属性(GA)。本文提出了四种测量模型,即指示性模型、显式模型、GA评估模型和最终模型来测量GA成就。指示性模型使用总评估分数作为GA达到的指标,而显式模型使用来自评估的特定分数。GA评估和最终模型利用了满足GA需求的评估的明确方法。最终模型只包括高级课程和顶点课程的评估。本研究旨在确定使用指标方法的指示性模型是否可以显著地代表GA成就。本研究亦探讨了评鉴选择在学业成绩上的差异。通过配对双样本均值t检验,对模型是否存在显著性差异进行统计分析。由于指示性模型与显式模型存在很大差异,因此不能代表GA成就。综合素质评估和最终模型都可以用来表征学生的综合素质达到程度。GA评估模型提供了对学生在GA成就方面的进展的监测,而最终模型可以在顶点和高级年份进行测量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Engineering graduate attribute attainment measurement models
ABSTRACT Various outcome-based education (OBE) performance measurement approaches demonstrate students’ attainment of a set of Graduate Attributes (GA) in the engineering programme. This paper presents four measurement models, namely the indicative, explicit, GA assessment, and culminating models, to measure GA attainment. The indicative model uses the total assessment mark as an indicator for GA attainment, whereas the explicit model utilises a specific mark from an assessment. The GA assessment and culminating models utilise the explicit approach from assessments that fulfil the GA requirement. The culminating model only consists of assessments from advanced and capstone courses. This research aims to determine whether the indicative model that uses an indicator approach can significantly represent GA attainment. This research also explores assessment selection differences in GA attainment. Statistical analysis was used to determine if the models were significantly different through the paired two-sample means t-test. The indicative model could not represent the GA attainment as it differed substantially from the explicit model. Both GA assessment and culminating models can be used to represent the attainment of students’ GA. GA assessment model provides monitoring of students’ progress in GA attainment, while the culminating models enable measurement at capstones and in advanced years.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
期刊最新文献
ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, SciSpace and Wolfram versus higher education assessments: an updated multi-institutional study of the academic integrity impacts of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) on assessment, teaching and learning in engineering Development of the Bipolar Junction Transistor Diagnostic Test (BJTDT) to explore the second-year undergraduate Myanmar electronic and Thai electrical engineering students’ understanding of BJT working principles and applications Unfolding learning difficulties in engineering drawing problem solving Unfolding learning difficulties in engineering drawing problem solving Recontextualising the teaching learning cycle within engineering education to improve the development of written communication skills
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1