2014 Fifth International Conference on Intelligent Systems, Modelling and Simulation
OBE Measurement System in Malaysian Institute of Information Technology
Universiti Kuala Lumpur
Zulfadli, Shamsul Anuar Mokhtar
Malaysian Institute of Information Technology
Universiti Kuala Lumpur
Jalan Sultan Ismail, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
E-mail: zulfadli@unikl.edu.my
E-mail: shamsulanuar@miit.unikl.edu.my
Abstract— Since 1950s, Malaysian education system
has already developed and has been practiced the Outcome
Based Education (OBE) approach especially in Higher
Education. It is a compulsory requirement for obtaining the
accreditation by the local accreditation body [6]. To fulfill
the requirement, Malaysian Institute of Information
Technology (MIIT) need to adopt and implement the OBE
approach in all programs offered. One of the important
steps in OBE that should be done is assessment of Course
Outcome (CO and program outcome (PO), they should be
assessed and analyzed to see the achievement of CO and PO
as expected. To do that, each CO must be linkages to PO.
MIIT has been develop an computerized system as required
to linking, assessing the achievement of COs and POs, the
system will simplify the assessment process to encourage the
Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI).
Keywords- OBE, Course Outcomes, Program outcomes,
assessment
I. INTRODUCTION
Outcome-Based Education is the educations that
focus on the achievement of results [1]. Results to be
achieved are cognitive, affective, and psychomotor of
each student in each subject, and also the values of
internal and external educational institutions [2].
When compared with the way traditional, OBE has
many advantages, such as flexibility and a guide for
assessment [3]. A major challenge in outcome-based
education is the design and implementation of an
appropriate system for student assessment, consideration
of the outcomes should be the basis for curriculum
development and evaluation [1].
In the era of OBE, University must always be alert
and monitor the quality systematically their graduates.
2166-0662/14 $31.00 © 2014 IEEE
DOI 10.1109/ISMS.2014.10
Sayani Puteh, Siti Mashitah Shamsul Anuar
IT Department of MIIT
Universiti Kuala Lumpur
Jalan Sultan Ismail, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
E-mail: sayani@miit.unikl.edu.my
E-mail: sitimashitah@unikl.edu.my
In line with the definition of OBE itself, OBE stands and
rules clear focus on the overall Education system,
especially in the ability, capability and experience
learning for each student at the end of their studies, this
process is starting from the identification of the results
(outcomes) of the students ability, innovations in the
operation until rules course syllabus curriculum and
assessment processes appropriate to achieve 'outcomes'
[4]. From this definition can also be said OBE is approach
to planning, implementing, assessment and evaluating the
extent to which achievement objectives and 'outcomes' of
a study program can be achieved.
OBE focuses on outcomes that are identified and
measured, these outcomes get from the scores of
measurement achievement, the scores will be
automatically categories into four domain namely
cognitive, affective, psychomotor and LOKI required by
MQA.
Summarize of Mohd. Ghazali Mohayidin said that,
the cognitive domain involve knowledge and the
development of intellectual skills. The psychomotor
domain consists of physical movement, coordination, and
use of the motor-skill areas. The affective domain
includes the manner in which the study deals with things
emotionally, such as feelings, values, appreciation,
enthusiasms, motivations, and attitudes [5]. LOKI is the
values that provides by MQA such as managerial and
entrepreneurial skills. These requirement need to prepare
the graduates for their professional skills after finish their
study.
This paper mainly to focuses on measurement
method using computerized system which is a new system
that developed by MIIT based on OBE approach, it will
be describes the methods used to MIIT as a pilot, the
method used is part of the framework, then next the
method will be material to developed an flexible and
general architecture and model which to be applied to
other campuses. Many job that will be done when
implemented the OBE approach, such as the linkage
between POs and COs as well as the assessment
strategies, the method used to measure and analyze the
12
achievement of COs for each course. The measurement is
to evaluate achievement, the results can be considered for
further improvement.

II. METHODOLOGY
To measure the achievement of CO and PO,
guidance has given. CO should be mapped to PO and the
instruments that will be used are left to each lecture on
each course [6]. At the figure 1 are the steps to measure
the achievement of CLO and PO in outline, before
making any assessment, it is important to do the planning
of what will be achieved and what is desired [7].
Therefore, necessary to set program objectives, setting
PO's and mapping CO-PO, bellow is the outline of
preparation and assessment step.

Figure 2. A brief review of user responsibility flow on the system

Under degree program that offered by the university,

they have a lot of course, under one course there are a lot
of CO. To measure COs they have to have a few
instruments, these instruments are set by each lecturer on
the subject, shows in figure 3. CO is produced by the
needs of program outcomes, COs must be linkages with
the POs so there must be mapped CO to PO and the last
all of the scores must categories into 4 domain,
represented in figure 4.

Figure 1. Preparation and assessment step in outline

Figure 3. An example of the relationship of instrument and CO
Figure 2 shows the users of the system, they are
program coordinator, subject leader and lecturer. They
plays an important function and role for evaluating and
ensure the achievement of cohorts for each semester,
program coordinator will produce the PO matrix, subject
leaders will be set up CO-PO mapping, while the lecturer
will set up CO distribution table. PO matrix prepared by
the program coordinator will affect CO-PO mapping
because it will be the input to the CO-PO mapping table,
CLO distribution that conducted by lecturer contains the
measuring instrument for each CO.
Figure 4. An example of the relationship of CO, PO and Domain

13
 The various outputs will be input on different
elements, a system is needed to ensure the process of
connecting many different elements going well, so that
the expected results from the assessment are completely
accurate and reflect the real situation.
Here is an example of POs taken from a program in MIIT.
PO1: Communicate effectively as an individual and as a
member or leader in diverse technical team.
PO2: Demonstrate awareness and consideration for
societal, safety and consequent responsibilities.
PO3: Understand and commit to professional ethics and
responsibilities and norms of engineering technology
practice.
PO4: Recognize the need for, and have the ability to
engage in independent and lifelong learning.

In the preparation step, the program coordinator

need to setup PO matrix that shows in figure 6, program
coordinator must match the PO to the Course, connecting
with tick, so that each course will be clustered and
connected with a particular PO.

Figure 5. Summarized flowchart of CQI process in outline

Assessment system was developed to measure

achievement on several levels they are COs achievement,
courses achievement, PO achievement and grouping the
results in 4 domain specified namely cognitive, affective,
psychomotor and LOKI. These performances, displayed
in reports tables are provided by the system. The analysis
results will reflect the required needs to improve the Figure 6. Example of PO matrix
ability of students and also can be material for the next
improvement and ensure the CQI process. Figure 5 above The data from table of PO matrix will effect to CLO-
is the summarized flowchart to see in outline the analyze PO mapping, shows in figure 7. For this case, the standard
step in order to fulfill CQI process. PO are 10 taken from manual book from stakeholders, but
they can be changed as needed, the mapping of CO to PO
III. RESULT S AND DISCUSSION using a simple and easy method is just by tick.
A. the mapping of CO to PO

Here are an example of COs that should be achieved,

these COs taken from electronic workshop practice course
at first semester.
CO1: Practice safety and health procedures in lab
workshop environment.
CO2: Understand and use the various electronics
components.
CO3: Demonstrate the operation of electronic test and
measurement system.
CO4 : Fabricate and analyze electrical circuits.

14
 the value of the threshold indicator is 50%, if result score
is 50% or more that mean CLO is achieved, but if the
results score below 50% that mean the CLO is failed or
not achieved.

Example case for each student:

(Test)+(Assignment)+(Final Exam) ≥ 50%, CO1 is

achieved.
And if (Test) + (Assignment) + (Final Exam) < 50%, CO1
is not achieved.

CO1 CO
Name Test Quiz Ass FE Total met
Figure 7. Example of CO-PO mapping (10) (10) (15) (15) (%) (Y/N)
Andy 10 10 10 10 80% Y
Next, lecturer must decide setup the instruments to Siti 10 5 5 15 70% Y
measure COs in their each course at CO distribution table Azmi 3 2 5 5 30% N
that shows in figure 8. Lecturer must decide which Figure 9.
instruments will measure every CO. each CO must set the
appropriate measuring instrument which can reflect the Based on the figure 9, CO 1 has four instruments
objectives to be achieved by each CO. instrument and they have full marks on each instrument. In the first
assigned to each lecturer of the subject. row, Andy get score 10 for each instrument, average score
of instrument in Andy's row is 80%, that mean is Andy
success in CO1 on course computer organization, because
Andy has passed the threshold indicator value, then letter
Y in column 'CO met' is to marked the achievement of
each student on that CO. At the last row is Azmi, he failed
because only got 30% from average scores, marked in
column 'CO met' using letter N, that mean fail.
Below is a simple calculation formula, this is the
score of Andy.

CO1 = (10+10+ 10+10) / Summarized instrument full

mark X 100
40/50 = 0.8 X 100 = 80%
CLO1 is achieved

C. Course Outcome Achievement Report

Keyed in students' scores obtained from the

measurement instrument doing by lecturer after the
preparation step is done, once they keyed in, the system
will automatically calculate the CO achievement of the
student, show in figure 10. And the system also links the
Figure 8. An example of CO distribution CO result to PO achievement then automatic categories
into 4 domain that should be achieved namely cognitive,
affective, psychomotor, and LOKI.
B. Measurement and Calculation of CO-PO
To measure the achievement of CO, it must have a
value as threshold indicator to decide whether the CO
achieved or not [8], the value is a percentage value that is
drawn from the calculation of instrument scores with
student attainment scores on the instrument. In this case,

15

Figure 10. CO report
Figure 11. Course analysis report.
Figure 11 shows an example of CO analysis report.
Analyzing report about course outcome complete with the
instrument percentage that successful achieved. This
report displays all CO in each course and the result of the
each CO.
D. Program Outcome Achievement Report
Based on manual book given by stakeholders, the
number of PO normally are 10, but they can be adjusted
by the program owners, the result of every CO on courses
will be influence to the related PO [9]. The PO will be
assessing based on percentage result of the each CO on
each course. Figure 12 will explain how the relationship
and contribution of CO to PO, and how to calculate the
achievement of PO.
16
Figure 12. PO achievement report.
Contains of the table is listing of CO achievement
and also number of a few PO that related to each CO,
complete with percentage of CO results, the percentage is
a value of performance indicator that achieved by a
course. The PO that successfully achieved will marked
with the letter Y, the letter is determined by the average
achievement of CO in the PO column. In assessing PO,
there are many ways that can apply, one of them is a
statistical method, and the method is used to look at the
overall contribution of PO in One semester, analyze
weaknesses and perform improvement.
PO achievement tables above, will be updated by the
end of the semester after the assessment of CLO
achievement is done, updates will be made based on the
student intake.
IV. CONCLUSION
In MIIT, the implementation of OBE assessment
system is relatively new, so need a lot of coordination to
understanding the system procedures. A method to
measure the CO and PO achievement of each student to
each course has been found, included the calculation
method and the framework as outline guidance to develop
and implement a computerized system, it makes the
assessment activities in MIIT will be simplify and easier
because the system will produce result automatically. The
system develop using java language program and will be
integrated with the main system in UNIKL as known E-
CITIE. The users of system are program coordinator,
subject leader and lectures.
The system makes measurement methods to evaluate
each achievement in the OBE approach be more
structured, using the system the weakness can be detect
and identified with action plan to continues improve time
to time.
 V. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PAPER
Contribution of this paper is to provide a clear
picture to the reader and other researchers how to adopt a
measurement method based on OBE approach as
implemented in MIIT as one of the methods that might be
considered by others researchers to follow,
implementation of the concept of OBE on each campus is
different because it has different missions vision and
instruments. So the paper is expected to provide
additional references to them in terms of technical
methods.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors are grateful to the reviewers who give
thoughtful comments to improve the quality of this paper.
And authors thank Siti Mashitah Anuar Mokhtar,
Executive in IT Department of MIIT, Universiti Kuala
Lumpur for her help.
17
REFERENCES
[1] Harden, J.C., MH Davis, M. Friedman, RM, AMEE Guide No. 14:
Outcome-based education: Part 5-From competency to meta-
competency: a model for the specification of learning outcomes.
Medical teacher, 1999. 21(6): p. 546-552.
[2] Malan, S. P. T. (2000). The'new paradigm'of outcomes-based
education in perspective. Journal of Family Ecology and
Consumer Sciences/Tydskrif vir Gesinsekologie en
Verbruikerswetenskappe, 28(1).
[3] Harden, R. M. (1986). Ten questions to ask when planning a
course or curriculum. Medical Education, 20(4), 356-365.
[4] Spady WG.Outcome-Based Education. ACSA report no 5.
Belconnen: pii Australian Curriculum Studies Association, 1993.
[5] Mohayidin, M. G., Suandi, T., Mustapha, G., Konting, M. M.,
Kamaruddin, N., Man, N. A., ... & Abdullah, S. N.(2009).
Implementation of Outcome-Based Education in Universiti
Putra Malaysia: A Focus on Students’ Learning Outcomes.
International Education Studies, 1(4), P147.
[6] Jaafar, M. S., Nordin, N. K., Wagiran, R., Aziz, ANoor, M. J. M.
M., Osman, M. R. ... & Abdul-Aziz, F. N. A. (2008, July).
Assessment strategy for an outcome based education. In
International Conference on Engineering Education.
[7] Ab Rahim, A.A.; Thamrin, N.M.; Abdullah, N. E.; Hashim, H.,
"Modern Control Systems in Electrical Engineering course
assessment using the Outcome Based Education approach,"
Engineering Education (ICEED), 2010 2nd International
Congress on , vol., no., pp.145,150, 8-9 Dec. 2010
[8] Lee, Y. K.; Rahim, A.; Thamrin, N.M.; Nor'aini, A. J.; Mohd
Asrol Alias, N.; Omar, N., "An Outcome Based approach to
delivery and assessment of a course in Control System Design,"
Engineering Education (ICEED),2009 International
Conference on , vol., no., pp.167,172, 7-8 Dec. 2009
[9] Kamal, M.M.; Latip, H.H.M.F., "Examinable course assessment
tool based on outcome based education," Engineering Education
(ICEED), 2009 International Conference on , vol., no.,
pp.177,182, 7-8 Dec. 2009