Design and validation of an instrument for the evaluation of learning outcomes in the civil engineering program at the University of Cartagena: integration of MEN, ABET and ASCE standards in a STEAM model and Post-COVID pedagogical adaptations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26507/paper.4385Keywords:
student outcome ABET, MEN, STEAM, ASCEAbstract
The University of Cartagena is committed to ensuring the quality of its academic programs, promoting the continuous improvement of its teaching and evaluation processes. In this context, the Civil Engineering program has developed various pedagogical strategies and assessment tools to ensure compliance with the Student Outcomes (SO). However, the evolution of educational models and the need to innovate in student performance assessment have driven the design and validation of an instrument that systematically and comparatively measures SO 3, 4, and 5 of the program.
This study aims to design and validate a measurement instrument for Learning Outcomes 3, 4, and 5, based on the Outcome-Based Education (OBE) methodology and aligned with the standards of the Ministry of National Education (MEN), the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), and ABET. The proposed instrument seeks to integrate the STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics) approach, fostering interdisciplinary learning and the development of key competencies among Civil Engineering students.
Additionally, this study includes the analysis of pedagogical strategies implemented in the program, incorporating participation in research groups, classroom and outreach projects, and field visits. These formative experiences play a fundamental role in the practical application of knowledge and the strengthening of skills such as critical analysis, problem-solving, and teamwork in real-world contexts. The integration of these elements into the evaluation instrument will allow for a comprehensive measurement of SO achievement.
The findings of this research are expected to contribute to strengthening the culture of self-evaluation and continuous improvement within the Civil Engineering program, optimizing teaching and assessment processes. Furthermore, the developed instrument may serve as a reference for implementation in other higher education institutions, adapting to different contexts and academic needs.
References
Adam Stefanile. (2020). The Transition From Classroom to Zoom and How it Has Changed Education. JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH, 16. https://doi.org/10.24297/jssr.v16i.8789
Anderson, L. W. (2012). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. In Encyclopedia of Curriculum Studies. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412958806.n446
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl Peter W Airasian, D. R., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A Taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Lorin W. Anderson, David R. Krathwohl, Peter W. Airasian, Kathleen A. Cruikshank, Richard E. Mayer, Paul R. Pintrich, James Raths, & Merlin C Wittrock, Eds.).
Ankerson, K. S., & Pable, J. (2020). Teaching and Learning at a Distance. In Interior Design. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781501371523.ch-006
Arievitch, I. M. (2020). The vision of Developmental Teaching and Learning and Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.01.007
ASCE. (2019). Civil engineering body of knowledge: Preparing the future civil engineer. In Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge: Preparing the Future Civil Engineer, Third Edition. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784415221
Bloom, B. S., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. In Handbook I: Cognitive Domain.
Bloom, B. S., & others. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Company. Inc., 1956. 207 Pp.
Çakiroğlu, Ü., & Er, B. (2020). Effect of using metacognitive strategies to enhance programming performances. Informatics in Education, 19(2). https://doi.org/10.15388/INFEDU.2020.09
Harianto, E., Nursalam, L. O., Ikhsan, F. A., Zakaria, Z., Damhuri, D., & Sejati, A. E. (2019).
THE COMPATIBILITY OF OUTDOOR STUDY APPLICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SUBJECT USING PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORIES OF INTELLIGENCE AND MEANINGFUL LEARNING IN SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL. Geosfera Indonesia, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.19184/geosi.v4i2.9903
Holmlund, T. D., Lesseig, K., & Slavit, D. (2018). Making sense of “STEM education” in K-12 contexts. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0127-2
Hussain, W., Spady, W. G., Naqash, M. T., Khan, S. Z., Khawaja, B. A., & Conner, L. (2020). ABET Accreditation during and after COVID19 - Navigating the Digital Age. IEEE Access, 8, 218997–219046. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3041736
Merfeldaitė, O., Prakapas, R., & Railienė, A. (2020). Challenges of distance teaching during covid-19: The experience of general education schools. Pedagogika, 140(4). https://doi.org/10.15823/p.2020.140.1
Morales López, S., Hershberger Del Arenal, R., & Arreguín, E. A. (2019). Evaluación por competencias: ¿cómo se hace? https://doi.org/10.22201/fm.24484865e.2019.63.3.08
Muhid, A., Amalia, E. R., Hilaliyah, H., Budiana, N., & Wajdi, M. B. N. (2020). The effect of metacognitive strategies implementation on students’ reading comprehension achievement. International Journal of Instruction, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13257a
Rao, N. J. (2020). Outcome-based Education: An Outline. Higher Education for the Future, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2347631119886418
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Self-Regulated Learning from Teaching to Self-Reflective Practice (D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman, Eds.). The Guilford Press.
Sekhar, C. R., Farook, O., & Bouktache, E. (2008). Continuous Improvement Process Based on Outcome Based Education. Proceedings of The 2008 IAJC-IJME International Conference.
Spady, W. G. (1994). Outcome-based education : critical issues and answers. American Association of School Administrators.
Tripp, B., & Shortlidge, E. E. (2019). A framework to guide undergraduate education in interdisciplinary science. CBE Life Sciences Education, 18(2). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.18-11-0226
Universidad de Cartagena. (2021a). Informe de Autoevaluación con fines de Acreditación Institucional Internaciona.
Universidad de Cartagena. (2021b). Proyecto Educativo del Programa de Ingeniería Civil.
Wilson, L. O. (2016). Understanding the new version of Bloom’s taxonomy. The Second Principle.
How to Cite
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Proceeding
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Asociación Colombiana de Facultades de Ingeniería - ACOFI
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
| Article metrics | |
|---|---|
| Abstract views | |
| Galley vies | |
| PDF Views | |
| HTML views | |
| Other views | |
