Evaluation Guidelines

for NBA Accreditation of Undergraduate

Engineering Programmes

October, 2008

Part-I: Evaluation at the Institute level.

a)  Qualitative Evaluation

Sr.No. / Item Description, with reference no. of Self Assessment Report (SAR) in parentheses / Evaluation Guidelines
The visiting team should encircle the most appropriate grading for each item, based on their judgment and add remarks in the column provided for the purpose.
1. / Student enrolment and basis of admission
(Part-I: 6B) / The visiting team will check
(a)  the enrolment status
(b)  admission norms for the students
(c)  whether the admission is entirely based on merit through state-level / national-level / their own entrance tests.
(d)  if the institute has a management quota, the percentage of students admitted through it and their admission criteria
(e)  if the institute is able to fill up all or nearly all the seats for the programs which it runs
(f)  if there is any lateral entry system for Diploma holders
2. / Students’ quality at the entry level (institute)
(Part-I: 6C) / The visiting team will check the students’ quality at the entry level for all the programmes. This should be based on the highest and the lowest ranks of different categories of students. The team may ask the institute to show the data published by entrance test authorities, through which a comparison should be made with other institutes in the State.
3. / Scholarships and financial assistance to the students
(Part-I: 6D) / It is expected that the institute should encourage and support meritorious students, whose financial conditions are inadequate. To this effect, some deserving students may be funded through institute funds, management trusts or funding through alumni and donors. The visiting team may check the amount and duration of such supports, and the number of students who can avail of it, etc.
4. / Counseling and guidance
(Part-I: 10) / The visiting team will ascertain if the institute
(a)  has any facility for career guidance
(b)  has any arrangement to assist students suffering from psychological disorders, depressions or trauma through professional counselors
5. / Training and placement facilities
(Part-I: 10) / The team will visit the training and placement facilities of the institute and confirm that
(a) there is a full time officer or a faculty who devotes adequate time for overseeing this facility
(b) the initiatives and enterprise of this section is in contacting different industries are satisfactory
(c) proper records of placements are maintained for the past few years
(d) the overall placement success of the institute is good
(e) satisfaction and comfort level of students with the functioning of the facility is high (to be ascertained during group discussions with the students)
(f) arrangements for pre-final year summer trainings and internships are adequate and good
6. / Facilities for inter-collegiate activities and industry interactions
(Part-I: 11) / It is expected that the institute promotes healthy interactions with other institutes and industries. The points which the visiting team will check are:
(a) details of the annual social/cultural fests and tech fests
(b) records of the organized visits to industries and R & D laboratories
(c) evidence of organized lectures by industry experts on technology trends and other important topics
7. / Safety norms and checks
(Part-I:12) / The visiting team is expected to check how much the institute is concerned about the safety of the students, teachers and staff. The points to be looked into are:
(a) storing and handling hazardous chemicals properly
(b) proper ventilation and exhausts in large capacity class rooms and labs
(c) special precautions on leakage and earthing of electrical equipment
(d) evidence of regular checks of wiring and electrical installations
(e) provision of emergency exits in auditoriums and large capacity class rooms/labs
(f) adequate availability of fire extinguishers and first-aid facilities
(g) safety notices in prominent places
(h) preparedness to handle emergencies in the classroom and at institute levels
(i) evidence of effective security arrangements at the entry points and the campus boundary

b)  Quantitative Evaluation

Sr.No. / Item Description with reference no. of SAR in parentheses / Evaluation Guideline
1. / Budget allocation and expenses
(Part-I: 5) / The chairperson of the visiting team is expected to check the allocation of adequate budget for plan (for developmental activities pertaining to infrastructure and equipment) and non-plan (such as salary, maintenance and other routine) expenditure. He is also expected to check the utilization of budget for institutional/ departmental activities. The generation/ mobilization of resources from Alumni or any other sources of donation are also important for the growth of the institution/ college/ programs.
Maximum marks 15
2. / Teacher-student ratio at the institute level
(Part-I: 6A) / The faculty strength, the qualifications of the individuals and their competence must be adequate to impart quality education. The evaluators may award 10 marks for a teacher student ratio of 15: 1 (averaged over past three years). Marks will be proportionally higher or lower, depending upon the ratio lower or higher than 15:1. To compute the ratio, data from item no. 6A and 6B of self assessment report part-I may be referred to.
Maximum marks 15
3. / Library
(Part-I: 8) / The visiting team will check the following and award marks according to the following norms:
- Adequacy of the number of titles in the core areas and the volumes per title to meet the needs of undergraduate students, post graduate students (if any) and faculty research: :5 marks
-Journal subscriptions (electronic and hard copy) : 2 marks
-Availability of a qualified librarian: 3 marks
-On-line access, printing and reprographic facilities within library premises: 3 marks
-Adequacy of borrowing limits per student/ faculty and the borrowing duration: 3 marks
-Availability of library automation and user-friendly search services: 3 marks
-Organized stacking of text books, reference and handbooks, journals (current and bound), project reports/ theses: 2 marks
-Adequacy of reading space and ambience: 3 marks
-Membership of INDEST and networking with other libraries: 2 marks
-Titles added in past one year: 2 marks
-Library timings (regular, vacation, examination time): 2 marks
-Library usage (users per day, issuance statistics): 3 marks
-Open access of books from the racks: 2 marks
Maximum marks 35
4. / Academic support units and common facilities
(Part-I: 8B) / The visiting team will make an overall assessment of the following academic support units through group discussions with the students and visits if necessary:
-Common core laboratories (Adequacy of space, number of students per batch, quality and availability of measuring instruments, laboratory manuals, list of experiments – for autonomous institutes): 7 marks.
-Common computer laboratory : 6 marks
-Language and communication skills laboratory: 6 marks
-Workshop and prototyping facilities: 6 marks.
Maximum marks 25
5. / Use of Information and Communication Technology and use of distance education.
(Part-I: 8C) / The visiting team will ascertain through group discussion with the students and teachers about
-Internet access facilities in the college.: 8 marks.
-Usage of distance education learning resources like NPTEL, MIT OCW etc. and/or procured video lectures and web courses: 7 marks
Maximum marks 15
6. / Co-curricular and extra curricular activities
(Part-I: 9) / The visiting team is expected to assess the facilities of co-curricular and extra-curricular activities, e.g., NCC/ NSS, sports, cultural activities, etc. The team may also assess the level of encouragement extended by the institute management to the students so that they can participate in such activities. Group discussion with the students may be the basis of such evaluations.
Maximum marks 10
7. / Teaching/ learning of science and humanities subjects / The visiting team is expected to interact with the faculty of science and humanities subjects and
- examine the adequacy of faculty strength
-go through the contents of these courses, lesson plans, question papers of university and also the valuation culture of the internal examinations
Maximum marks 35

c)  Quantitative Evaluation – Bonus Points

Sr.No. / Item Description with reference no. of Self Assessment Report (SAR) in parenthesis / Evaluation Guidelines
1. / Significant achievements of the college
(Part-I: 13) / The visiting team will evaluate the merits of the achievements listed by the college in self-assessment document and make some on-the-spot assessments. Significant achievements, which are academic/ research and development in nature will only be considered.
Maximum marks 15
2. / Goals planned
(Part-I: 14) / The visiting team will study the goals planned by the college, as stated in self-assessment document and examine its merits as well as feasibility of implementation. The visiting team should feel convinced that the college is making sincere efforts to implement these goals.
Maximum marks 10
3. / Critical assessment of strengths and weaknesses
(Part-I: 15) / Critical assessment of own strengths and weaknesses promote healthy growth of the college. If the visiting team’s assessment of strength and weaknesses and what the college has stated in self-assessment document match, it goes as a plus point in their critical assessment capabilities. Moreover, there should be visible efforts from the college to correct their weaknesses.
Maximum marks 20

Part-II : Program Specific Evaluation

a)  Quantitative Evaluation

Sr.No. / Item Description with reference number of SAR in parenthesis / Evaluation Guidelines
1. / Class rooms and faculty offices
(Part-II: 5A) / The evaluators will visit the class rooms and faculty rooms and check the following:
a) Size of the class rooms; air circulation and lighting; variety of teaching aids- blackboard, multimedia projectors, computers; conditions of chairs/benches; acoustics (evaluators may check while a lecture is going on in a filled class room) : 6 marks
b) Size of faculty rooms; sharing or privacy; availability of blackboard/ whiteboard; computers; internet access : 4 marks
Maximum marks 10
2. / Laboratories
(Part-II: 5B) / The evaluators will visit all the undergraduate laboratories and check the following:
a) Size of the laboratories as compared to section strength; number of students per experimental set up; overall ambience: 3 marks
b) Availability of sufficient equipments to run experiments and their maintenance: 3 marks
c) Laboratory manuals; students’ lab records; list of experiments (for autonomous colleges): 2 marks
d) Facilities to do hardware projects, availability of labs beyond working hours, encouragements for mini-projects etc: 2 marks
Maximum marks 10
3. / Computing facilities
(Part-II: 5D) / The evaluators will check computing facilities available in the department. They should specifically ensure:
a) Adequacy of computers to carry out computing assignments, simulation based experiments, software projects. : 4 marks
b) Licensed software, their validity, user restrictions on licenses etc: 2 marks
c) Maintenance of computers and regular obsolescence removal : 2 marks
d) Access of Internet, library e-resources and distance learning from the department: 2 marks
Maximum marks 10
4. / Budget and expenses
(Part-II: 5E) / The evaluators will check the allocation of adequate budget and its utilization for departmental library, laboratory equipments and consumables. They may check the major resources.
Maximum marks 10
5. / Students- Quality at the entry level
(Part-II: 6B) / The evaluators will check the students’ quality at the entry level for this program. This should be based on the highest and the lowest ranks of different categories. They may ask the college to show the data published by entrance test authorities, through which a comparison can be made with other institutes running similar programs. The evaluators may award marks on a smooth scale of 20, depending upon the popularity of this program vis-à-vis similar programs offered in other institutes in the state.
Maximum marks 20
6. / Students- Success rate
(Part-II: 6C) / The success index I for the batch that has graduated is to be computed as I = , where X4 and X0 are defined in Part-II, item-6C of self assessment report.
The evaluators may verify the data provided by the college in self assessment report part-II 6C with university/ institute results summary for the program offered by the college in past five years.
Maximum marks 40
7. / Students- Academic performance levels
(Part-II: 6D) / An academic performance index J is to be calculated as J = , where Y1, Y2 and Y3 are defined in Part-II, item-6D of self assessment report and the weights G1=10, G2=8 and G3=6.
The evaluators may verify the data provided by the college in self assessment report part-II 6D with university/ institute results analysis for the program offered by the college in past five years.
Maximum marks 40
8. / Students- Placement and higher studies
(Part-II: 6E) / Placement and higher studies are two most important factors in measuring the success of the program. As a guideline, marks may be awarded as follows:
a)  Percentage of outgoing students (compared to their batch strength) who have been placed when they finished their studies. The data should be supported with copies of appointment letters available in the college. Some weighting should be given to the quality of the jobs they get, vis-à-vis current market conditions: 30 marks
b)  It is also expected that a fraction of students should go for higher professional/ management studies in India or abroad. If 10% or more students go for higher studies, it is the best, otherwise, proportionately award marks. The evaluators may also put some weighting on the quality of their admission offers: 5 marks
Maximum marks 35
9. / Students- Academic counseling, guidance and mentoring
(Part-II: 7) / There is a need to constantly monitor the academic performance of the students, identifying weaker students, counseling for their improvements. The evaluators will check the following factors:
a)  System of faculty advisors for academic monitoring, the frequency of students- faculty advisors interaction (may be ascertained through group discussions with the program students) : 10 marks
b)  Existence of facility of slow-pace program for weaker students : 5 marks
c)  Existence of remedial classes for weaker students? : 5 marks
Maximum marks 20
10. / Students- Professional activities
(Part-II: 8) / It is expected that the students should take adequate initiatives to pursue some professional activities in addition to their curriculum based studies. The evaluators may award marks as per the following guidelines: