Author(s)

Yetursance Y. Manafe^*, Louis F. Boesday

Affiliation(s)

Electrical Engineering Education Study Program, University of Nusa Cendana, Indonesia.

Corresponding Author

Yetursance Y. Manafe

ABSTRACT

The study was conducted to design and analyze measurement instruments for outcome learning in the Electrical Engineering Education Study Program at Nusa Cendana University that are relevant and comprehensive enough to help with the accreditation process. Unafurnished learning outcomes is a useful index of education quality and it is absolutely necessary to evaluate it qualitatively to meet the accreditation standard of study programs put forward by national accreditation body. This research was conducted to produce a procedure for instrument design to measure progress in learning through a three-stage process adapted from a quantitative and qualitative perspective (model and trial). Quantitative method: This method is used to collect data using questionnaires distributed to students and lecturers; Qualitative method: This method is applied through interviews and focus group discussions with stakeholders. The data obtained was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistical methods to evaluate the effectiveness of learning outcomes and identify areas for improvement. The research findings showed that the instrument design could measure learning outcomes with a good level of validity and reliability. Furthermore, the analysis of the data shows that learning outcomes in the Study Program of Electrical Engineering Education have achieved most of the assessment criteria by accreditation institutions, even though there are still some elements that need to be improved. Thus, this finding provides valuable insight in strategizing to enhance the quality of learning and plan for accreditation in the long run.

KEYWORDS

Learning outcomes; Qualitative; Quantitative; Learning; Accreditation

CITE THIS PAPER

Yetursance Y. Manafe, Louis F. Boesday.Measurement design and evaluation analysis of learning achievements to support accreditation in the electrical engineering education study program, nusa cendana university. Journal of Language, Culture and Education Studies. 2025, 2(1): 1-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61784/jlces3005.

REFERENCES

[1] Sudarta. No Title. 2022, 16(1): 1–23.

[2] C Q Trank, S L Rynes. Who Moved Our Cheese? Reclaiming Professionalism in Business Education. Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ., 2003, 2(2): 189–205. DOI: 10.5465/amle.2003.9901678.

[3] J Wellington. More than a matter of cognition: An exploration of affective writing problems of post-graduate students and their possible solutions. Teach. High. Educ., 2010, 15(2): 135–150. DOI: 10.1080/13562511003619961.

[4] N O Kafwa. Teacher Preparation Practices in Kenya and the 21 st Century Learning?: A Moral Obligation. J. Educ. Pract., 2015, 6(17): 1–9.

[5] P Di Nauta, P Omar, A Schade, et al. Accreditation Models in Higher Education. 2004.

[6] OECD. Resourcing Higher Education. 2020. DOI: 10.1787/735e1f44-en.

[7] N N L Handayani, K W Wiguna. Learning Tools Based on Outcome Based Education to Improve Student Learning Outcomes. J. Penelit. dan Pengemb. Pendidik., 2024, 8(1): 134–142. DOI: 10.23887/jppp.v8i1.69235.

[8] A Alyasin, R Nasser M. El Hajj, et al. Assessing Learning Outcomes in Higher Education: From Practice to Systematization. TEM J., 2023, 12(3): 159–1604. DOI: 10.18421/TEM123-41.

[9] V M Cantika, A Alhayat. Implementation of Outcome-Based Education in a Leading High School (a Case Study at SMA Taruna Bakti Bandung). Proc. Ser. Soc. Sci. Humanit., 2023, 12: 52–59. DOI: 10.30595/pssh.v12i.773.

[10] H M Asim, A Vaz, A Ahmed, et al. A Review on Outcome Based Education and Factors That Impact Student Learning Outcomes in Tertiary Education System. Int. Educ. Stud., 2021, 14(2): 1. DOI: 10.5539/ies.v14n2p1.

[11] T A Litzinger. Engineering education and the development of expertise. J. Eng. Educ., 2011, 100(1): 123–150. DOI: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00006.x.

[12] N Devaki. Holistic and Outcome - Based Paradigm in Education, 2024, 1. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/379155577

[13] M Vogt. Sustainability certifications. Sustain. Certif. Schemes Agric. Nat. Resour. Sect., 2019: 1–26. DOI: 10.4324/9780203701737-1.

[14] W E Kelly. Certification and accreditation in civil engineering. J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract., 2007, 133(3): 181–187. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2007)133:3(181).

[15] D Holsinger. Positioning secondary school education in developing countries: Expansion and curriculum, 2000. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251379453.

[16] P Glewwe, M Kremer. Chapter 16 Schools, Teachers, and Education Outcomes in Developing Countries. Handb. Econ. Educ., 2006, 2(6): 945–1017. DOI: 10.1016/S1574-0692(06)02016-2.

[17] S A Ware. The Education of Secondary Science Teachers in Developing Countries. PHREE Backgr. Pap. Ser., 1992: 6–9. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EDUCATION/Resources/278200-1099079877269/547664-1099080063795/The_education_of_secondary_science_teachers_EN92.pdf.

[18] N F Ruhyana, A N Aeni. Effect of Educational Facilities and Infrastructure in Primary Schools on Students’ Learning Outcomes. Mimb. Sekol. Dasar, 2019, 6(1): 43. DOI: 10.17509/mimbar-sd.v6i1.15225.

[19] J Geiling. Resource-poor settings: Infrastructure and capacity building: Care of the critically ill and injured during pandemics and disasters: CHEST consensus statement. Chest, 2014, 146: e156S-e167S. DOI: 10.1378/chest.14-0744.

[20] J M Ngwaru, M Oluga. Educational infrastructure and resources for sustainable access to schooling and outcomes: The case of early literacy development in Southern Tanzania. Africa Educ. 2015, 12(1): 88–108. DOI: 10.1080/18146627.2015.1036570.

[21] J A Douglass, R. Edelstein. The Global Competition For Talent: The Rapidly Changing Market for International October 2009. Educ. News, 2009: 22. http://escholarship.org/uc/item/0qw462x1.pdf.

[22] M Petticrew. Implications of a complexity perspective for systematic reviews and guideline development in health decision making. BMJ Glob. Heal., 2019, 4: 1–12. DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000899.

[23] G T Wilson, S J Rachman. Meta-analysis and the evaluation of psychotherapy outcome: Limitations and liabilities. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol., 1983, 51(1): 54–64. DOI: 10.1037/0022-006X.51.1.54.

[24] Y H J Chang, A Mosleh. Cognitive modeling and dynamic probabilistic simulation of operating crew response to complex system accidents. Part 1: Overview of the IDAC Model,” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 2007, 92(8): 997–1013. DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2006.05.014.

[25] S Messick. The Nature of Cognitive Styles: Problems and Promise in Educational Practice. Educ. Psychol., 1984, 19(2): 59–74. DOI: 10.1080/00461528409529283.

[26] T Byrne, J P T Mo. Critical factors in successful performance based contracting environment. Adv. Transdiscipl. Eng., 2014, 74(4): 736–745. DOI: 10.3233/978-1-61499-440-4-736.

[27] C Hertzog, A F Kramer, R S Wilson, et al. Enrichment Effects on Adult Cognitive Development,” Psychol. Sci. Public Interes., 2008, 9(1): 1–65. DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01034.x.

[28] R Glaser. Education and thinking: The role of knowledge. Am. Psychol., 1984, 39(2): 93–104. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.39.2.93.

[29] E Gibson. Exploratory Behavior In The Development Of Perceiving, Acting, And The Acquiring Of Knowledge. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 1988, 39, 1: 1–41. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.39.1.1.

[30] C Eliasmith. A large-scale model of the functioning brain. Science (80-. )., 2012, 338(6111): 1202–1205. DOI: 10.1126/science.1225266.

[31] P Domain. Chapter 3 Psychomotor Domain. 2024.

[32] T Supartini, I T J Weismann, H Wijaya, et al. Development of learning methods through songs and movements to improve children’s cognitive and psychomotor aspects. Eur. J. Educ. Res., 2020, 9(4): 1615–1633. DOI: 10.12973/EU-JER.9.4.1615.

[33] C A E Moulton, A Dubrowski, H MacRae, et al. Teaching surgical skills: What kind of practice makes perfect? A randomized, controlled trial. Ann. Surg., 2006, 244(3): 400–407. DOI: 10.1097/01.sla.0000234808.85789.6a.