CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT:

ENGINEERING PEDAGOGY FOR A

SUSTAINABLE FUTURE
By
Prof. M.R. PRANESH
Professor in Ocean Engineering (Rtd)
IIT Madras Chennai- 600036
Currently Visiting Professor,
School of Engg & Technology, Jain University,
Bangalore.
M: 09845960865: Tel: 080-65681794

TERMINAL OBJECTIVE

To be capable of Designing an Engineering Curriculum

with Sustainable Future Concept

INTERMEDIATE OBJECTIVE

To change the ATTITUDE towards effective learning and

teaching

TARGET AUDIENCE : PARTICIPANTS OF QIP

TIME

90 min; 90 min

EQUIPMENT

PREREQUISITE

GOAL

SUPER GOAL

BLACK BOARD &

POWER POINT
EXPOSURE TO ENGINEERING
CURRICULUM
TRAINING THE TRAINER
TO BE A GOOD FACULTY
TO MOULD INTO A PEER
ACADEMICIAN

KEYWORDS:

AUDIT
CURRICULUM
ENGINEERING
INPUT
INTERACTION
MEASURABLE
OUTPUT
PEDAGOGY
SUSTAINABLE
SYSTEM

 Lecture

focuses on 3 factors
Curriculum development (to indicate
attitudes, abilities and skills)
Engineering pedagogy (teaching
methodology, learning methodology,
measuring tools, Curriculum audit)
Sustainable future (Resource depletion,
concept to use resources without making
subsequent generation to suffer, concept of
sustainable curriculum)

 CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT is an

essential ENGINEERING component to

structure the knowledge that to be given
as an Input mechanism

 Pedagogy is the Art of transferring this

structured knowledge
2500 B.C Model making, pottery
making, Goldsmiths work etc.,

 The present day concept it is skill

development
Pyramid construction Egypt

MAJOR COMMITTEES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Committee

Title

Year

Recommendations

Sarkar committee

Higher Technical
Institutions for the
Post-war Industrial
Development

1945

Setting up of Indian Institutes of

Technology

Thacker Committee

Postgraduate
Engineering
Education and
Research

1959Funding for 100 PhDs annually

1961

Nayudamma Committee

Postgraduate Education
in Engineering &
Technology

1979PG minimum qualifications for

1980
industry, R&D, etc.,

Nayudamma Committee

IIT Review

1986

Greater flexibility in Academic

programme, Focus on engineering
research, Faculty mobility

1995

21 months M.Tech, Increased

scholarship amount, Assured
employment for M.Techs, National
Doctoral Programme

P. Rama Rao Committee Reshaping Postgraduate

Education in
Engineering &
Technology

MAJOR COMMITTEES AND

RECOMMENDATIONS
R.A. Mashelkar Committee

Strategic Road Map of

Academic Excellence of
Future RECs

1998

Conversion of RECs into NITs

with the status of a Deemed to
be University and structural
changes in governance

U.R. Rao Committee

Revitalising the Technical

Education

2003

Regional inequity to be
removed, Faculty shortage to
be addressed, Need for
planning and coordination in
the working of AICTE

P. Rama Rao Committee

IIT Review

2004

Increase UG output of IITs,

Fund infrastructure increase,
Add new IITs but maintain
quality

MHRD

Additional I.I.Ts

Beyond 2008

Now I.I.Ts were started

Many institutions in
India
2007-2008 on wards
changes in curriculum
based on

Supply-Demand
Industrialization
Globalisation

Sl.
No.

Category of Institutions

Institutions of Higher learning like IISc, IITS,

NITS.

University colleges with engineering

Technical University
a) Autonomous colleges, b) Aided, c) Unaided

Private Universities

Open Universities

Multiple Technical Universities within the state

like Andhrapradesh, Tamil Nadu

Professional bodies IE(I)

 Curriculum in all the above system are not

the same

Variation in course content ~25 to 40 %

Curriculum Development

Development of a curriculum
development is a dynamic
phenomenon. Further difficulties are
when the multifarious engineering
functions are to be incorporated. Each
requiring different:
i) Skills, ii) Attitudes & iii) Ablities.

 The requirement scenario for

R & D laboratories
Engineering teachers
Industries
Building developers
I-T sector etc.,

Options available are

Which produces only one type of

engineering graduates
Which permits sufficient flexibility to
permit choice of adequate number of
course to meet the design carrier
requirements of the students.
Second options - difficult

Implemented solutions
Train the recruited graduates to suit their

requirement under Trainee Graduates

Present Scenario

Basic Sciences & mathematics

Engineering Sciences
Design (Application of concepts)
Computers (Soft skill)
Laboratory (Hard skill)
Projects (minor, major) (Team work)
Electives (within the discipline)

Global Statistics
25% through curriculum
75% in their working place
Pre-university CBSE, ICSE, etc.,

New Generation

Capacity to learn and keep learning

Capabilities for assessment, adaptation and
upgradation
Ability to understand mathematics and sciences
Effective communication mechanism
Problem solving skills
Interest to work in interdisciplinary areas
Ability to work in a Team
Advances in Information Technology
Sustainable engineering principles

FACTS TO BE CONSIDERED

Social engineering (S)

Technology development is at rapid pace T(t)
Real life problems which are interdisciplinary (R)
Information and Communication Technology (I)
Psychology (P)
Creation of appropriate infrastructure. (Hardware,
qualified academicians)
Methodology of introducing engineering to a fresher

N.C.D= fn { S, T (t), R, (P,I, C, T1 (human))

. eq (1)

SYSTEMS APPROACH
Curriculum Innovation: DESIGN Task

Output:
Competence based

Passive in class
Students are always

passive in the class.

Hence, neither the active experimentor nor
the reflective observer can learn
effectively. It is UNFORTUNATE to note
that most of the engineering classes fall
into this category namely one. Out come of
this physical situation is inspite of the
effectively designed curriculum cannot be
transferred in the class room due to
CONSTRAINTS.

CURRICULUM

INPUT
(RAW STUDENTS)

OUTPUT
(ENGG. GRADUATES)

FIG 1. ENGINEERING CURRICULUM

TEACHING (Skills Knowledge,

absorption)
STUDENTS

GRADUATES
FIG 2. SYSTEMS CONCEPT

To define
Input Output
Teaching-learning process

(Education Process)

 The student is a rather passive recipient.

This is a common form of educational

process. The accent is on teaching rather
than learning. If the student acquires
knowledge from i) books, ii) lectures, iii)
laboratories, iv) projects, v) field visits, vii)
group discussion, then the student plays
an active role

TEACHING
STUDENTS
(Existing)

GRADUATES (With
Knowledge
absorbed)
NEW Methods to
transform
to active state

FIG 3. TRANSFORMATION FROM PASSIVE STATE TO ACTIVE STATE.

INPUT OUTPUT DESCRIPTION

Sl No Details

Characterizations

INPUT

Course content (as designed)

OUTPUT Skills, abilities, knowledge,

competence, self-confidence

Curriculum Development
C.D
A
E
M
S

: Development
: Applied Curriculum Research
: Ecology & Environment
: Malfunctioning & Ego-based
approach
: Social Engineering

C.D = Function of Time

Parameters are to be quantified
Quantification to be done with time

Transfer of Technology
Weak ?

CURRICULUM

IMPLEMENTATION

Weak due to Inertial effect

DESIGNING THE E.S

Problem analysis (PA) : In an output domain
Course requirement plan (CRP) : To include

Learning out come

Development of course material
Modules preparation
Life cycle life span analysis

Concept solutions: Laboratories, Lectures, Working

group, Projects
Simulation of concepts: Mathematical or technical
sense
Evaluation and final choice : This is crucial
Examination, Continuous evaluation

 UNIFICATION OF ENGINEERING

EDUCATION IS TO BE COMMENCED AT
LEAST BY 2020
Methodology to be followed;
Redefine the curriculum
Restructure the course with Technology
development in the forefront

ENGINEERING PEDAGOGY
Interdisciplinary approach
Austria, Germany, Switzerland, USA

International Engineering education

Society
Engineering pedagogical science
Pre-requisite : Mastery of the fundamental

science

Art of Teaching

Innovation engineering
Communication paradigms
Technology strategy
Principles of management
Design of operating models (Physical
and software baised)

Methods of Teaching
Hierarchical selection of problem
Components
Parameters

LEARNING & TEACHING STYLES

Teaching methods vary from faculty to

faculty. Some faculty lectures, others
may discuss or demonstrate the same.
Some may focus on principles and
others an applications. Hence, students
will learn by combinations of a) seeing
b) hearing c) reflecting d) reasoning
logically e) memorizing f) visualizing g)
analogies h) mathematical models i)
physical models etc.,

Students ability

prior preparation of the student

compatibility of learning style

teachers teaching style

TIME Vs ABSORPTION
(AVARAGE)

 Mismatches exists between common

learning styles and traditional teaching

styles. Ultimately students become
BORED, inattentive in class. This results
in poor formance of the students in
assessments. Hence, students gets
discouraged about courses.

FRAME WORK FOR LEARNING

Faculty Assumes that students
Learn through
Lectures
Laboratory work
Problem sets
Library work

Teaching Methods
For some students
Efficient
For others Ineffective

MOTIVATION CONCEPT
MOTIVATION
Faculty
(Individual)

Student
(Situation)

P=fn (A, O, M)
Where P=Performance, A=ABILITY, O=Opportunity, M=Motivation

Teacher

Students
strength

Faculties

Outcome

40

15

Teaching
Aid, LRD

Good
Teachin
g

 Student may prefer that the lectures be

Problem

solving
Question papers solving
Handouts & Reading matters
Verbally & Graphically
Through lectures

Now it is essential to examine

Which aspects of learning style are

particularly significant in engineering
education

Which learning style is preferred

What can be done to reach students

whose learning styles are not
addressed by standard methods?

DIMENSIONS OF LEARNING STYLE

This is a structured setting, can be conceived as two-step process.
This is i) Reception and ii) Information process
Memorization

Reception
(External Information) Process
(Understanding)

Reflection

Out come
(Learnt / not

Learnt)
I= Interaction
Fig 5. LEARNING STYLE MODEL

TEACHING & LEARNING STYLES

Sl
No
1

LEARNING STYLE

TEACHING STYLE

Sensory

Factual

Intutive type

(Concrete)

Perception

Input

Auditory
Visual

Content

Coceptual
(abstract)

Presentation

Inductive
Organization

(facts)
Deductive
(principles)

Organization

Visual
Verbal
Inductive

deductive

Active
Processing
Reflective

Active
Student
Interaction
Passive

Global

Global

Understanding
(in-large jumps)
Sequential
Perspective
Sequential
(continuous steps)

Examination of Table 4, indicates that there are 32

learning styles[25] and similarly 32 types of teaching
styles in a class, Usually in engineering education,
normally addresses 5 groups viz, i) intuitive, ii) auditory,
iii) deductive iv) reflective and v) sequential and effective
teaching techniques overlaps with other groups.
32(25) learning style
32(25) teaching style

INSTRUCTIONAL OBJECTIVES
STATEMENTS
Specify the point at which mastery should
occur
To commence the phrase describing th
expected behavior
Ex: When this topic is completed, you are
in a position to define the variables
*In-order to well in the next test

Unacceptable Verbs
Know, learn, understand, appreciate
Use of any Jargons like;

Something like that

Did you follow
Just like that
Is it right
Did you catch the point

For example
If instructor says: Goal is : to understand

first low of thermodynamics

Question is : How the students directly
understand, if they do not know first law?

Instructional Objectives

Knowledge : Repeating memorised information

Compression : Explaining the concepts (Free of Jargons)
Application : Applying course, material to solve straight
forward problems
Analysis : solving complex problems, Developing
process models
Synthesis : Designing experiments, devices, process,
products
Evaluation : Choosing from various alternatives
From 1-3 : low level skills : 4-6 : higher level skills

Introduction of course to students

TRUST ME approach
i.e. Introducing the new course in which students
are not exposed earlier
For example.
To start on: 1) Bending theory in beams without
exposing to force system
2) Security and safety in computer networking
Trust me approach will not stimulate neither
interest nor motivation to learn

Pedagogy techniques to match all learning styles

Motivate learning
Provide balance information of facts (concrete) and concepts
(abstract)
Emphasise practical problem solving
Illustrations to be explicit
Use scientific method to present theoretical material
Use figures, Graphs, pictures liberally provide demonstrations
Use computer assisted instruction (CAI)
Do not engage the entire class with writing on board, lecturing
and dictating
Introduce small brain-storming activities
Structure the course with small assignments
Appreciate the creative solutions (Though it may incorrect)
Counsel the students regarding learning styles

 Student-teacher interaction viz, learning-

teaching styles are incompatible in several

dimensions. This leads to poor
performance of students, professorial
frustration and loss to society of many
potentially better engineers.

Teaching objective is to facilitate long term

retention of knowledge out come being
Improves problem solving skill
Thinking skills
Motivating to study
Challenge: to involve most of students in
productive activities without
sacrificing course content
Control of the class
Suggestions: Divide into multiple groups and
give brief exercise of 2-3 mts

BARRIER TO COMMUNICATION
Physical
Psychological
Problems of the students
Better with written communication

Techniques to improve
communication
Enrich vocabulary
Cultivate reading habits
Better speaking environment
Listening practice
Pronunciation skills
Seminars
Mock Interviews

Teaching Techniques

To formulate and publish clear instructional

objectives
Establish relevance of course material and teach
inductively
Balance the information in each course
(concrete and abstract)
Promote active learning in class
Use co-operative learning
Give fair tests
Concern a sense of concern about students
learning as well as well being

Vision of Development
Natural Resource
Eco-System
Population
Industrialization

To Integrate
Right
Education
Human security
Intellectual dialogue

Sustainable Engineering Education

Sustainable Development:
Economic growth and development

without sacrificing the needs of future

generations
UN(United Nations) Declared 2005-14 as
Decade of education for sustainable
development

 Re-examination of curriculum
Restructuring of course
Development of inter disciplinary, multi-

disciplinary courses

Subjects developed to be
Basic subjects
Core subjects
Elective subjects

Electives can be modified based on

Technology development scenario
Interaction of allied disciplines like
Social
Psychology
Political
Legal
Entrepreneurship

Industrial state is currently

unsustainable. This is due to
Industrialized state (developed or

developing) is currently unsustainable.

This is due to multifarious problem viz., i)
Resource depletion ii) environmental
injustice iii) climate change iv) purchasing
power v) Toxic pollution vi) eco-systems
and vii) economic inequality.

Fragmentation of knowledge base

leading to understanding of basic
problems
Tendency towards governance of
industrial system by old ideas
To deal sensibly with effects which span
long time horizons

 Sustainable development is not an

environmental issue but deals with

economic, ecology, environmental and
social dimensions. Off trade may be
essential between employment
competitiveness and environment . Hence
systems change is essential for
sustainable development. The policy for
sustainable approach is presented in Table
5.

SUSTAINABLE APPROACH
Sl

Approach Competitivenes Employment

N
s
o

Environment

Current

Improve
Supply
performanc
adequately
e of
trained
students
personnel

Teach to save
resources and
environment

Sustaina
ble

Introduce
systems
approach
and
problem
solving
skills

Change resource
and energy
dependency

Radical change
in Human
Resource

From Table 5, it is seen that sustainable

approach is focused on Technological
change. This change is to be
incorporated through engineering
curriculum with
i) Inter-disciplinary ii) Multi-disciplinary
and iii) Trans-disciplinary teaching.

Joint appointments
Ex: Ocean Engineering, IIT Madras
Applied machines, IITM

Measuring tools

Taught through conventional methods

Amalgamation of I.A, midterm & final
examination
Outcome: Pas or fail
Teachers evaluation
Feed-back analysis
Constraints: Response may be poor
Multiple suggestions might have cropped up

Curriculum Audit

After teaching the course for 2 consecutive

semesters, auditing is to be done by the
respective department. This audit should
superpose the feed-back analysis given by
student on curriculum. This helps to improve the
curriculum for subsequent semesters. Feedback is to be collected from students who have
attended 75% and more classes. Department in
holistic approach must audit all the courses
(including laboratory, workshops, seminars)
without any bias.

 This helps in improving the course content

specifically and curriculum in general. The

audit to be deemed as a FACT finding
machine and not as a FAULT finding
machine.

Curriculum audit is always performed against the

documented system. It establishes the adequacy of
the system, its conformance with different activities of
engineering curriculum and pedagogy. The main
features are
Systematic evaluation of a) representative sample (2
to 4 teaching hours and arriving at the conclusion on
the subject.
Documented procedures mentioned in the curriculum
for laboratory, drawings, tutorials were met the need
base or otherwise.
Audit is to be performed by a faculty who is not
directly responsible for teaching that subject.
The quality of curriculum auditors

QUALITIES OF THE CURRICULUM

AUDITOR
Sl No
1

DESIRABLE
FACT FINDING

UNDESIRABLE
FAULT FINDING

2
3

POLITE
DIRECT

RUDE
MEANDERING

4
5

PERSISTENT
DECISIVE

LAZY
INBECISIVE

6
7

PREPARED
HONEST

UNPREPARED
DISHONEST

8
9

UNBIASED
TACTFUL

BIASED
ANTAGONISTIC

10

COMMUNICATIVE

UNCOMMUNICATIVE

DOCUMENTED SYSTEM FOR AUDIT

Civil Engineering Subject
Sl No

INSTITUTE OR
UNIVERSITY

CONSOLIDATION

CLAY MINERALS

No. Of
WEEKS

THEORY
(HRS)

LAB

THEORY
(HRS)

LAB

VTU, Belgaum (4,3)

9
No derivation

Demo

Demo

13

Bangalore
University

10

Semi Demo

3 (Stru)

Yes

16

Kuvempu
University

6
Derivation

Semi Demo
2-3 days

Small %

Yes

16

M.I.T Manipal

7
No Derivation

Expt
CV

Small %

Yes

13

Anna University
chennai

9
Compr &
Consolidat
ed

Upto CV

Yes

14

N.I.T. Surat (Guj)

Demo
e-log p

Demo

13

N.I.T. K
Suratkal

8
No derivation

Lab work
2-3 days

Small %

Yes

14

I.I.T Bombay

4 hrs
Derivation

Lab work
e-log p

Yes

13

I.I.T Madras

4
Derivation

Semi-demo
e-log p
2-3 days

Yes

14

Table-8 Audit for Digital Electronics

Topic 1 Sequential Circuits (A)
Topic 2 Boolean Algebra(B)

Sl.No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

University Or
Institute

A( Hrs)

B (Hrs)

Kashmir
CJSM Kanpur
ANNA Chennai
GMR Kakinada
JU Bangalore
VTU Karnataka
GTU Gujrat
Charusatec

12
9
9
15
7
7
nil
15

12
9
9
15
14
nil
20
6

Duration Of course
in weeks, Units,
Sem
15, 5,3
15, 5, 2
15, 5, 2
15, 4, 4
15, 8, 3
13, 8, 3
15, 5, 3
15, 7, 4

Text Books Digital Design- M Maris Mano

15 Weeks- 7, 13 Weeks-01, 2nd Sem- 2 Third Sem-4 & 4th Sem-2
With Tutorials-2 Sl. No. 3&4

Outcome of curriculum audit may be revision of

curriculum as well as modality of teaching with
sustainable concept.
Motivation
Faculty
(Individual)
(Knowledge base)

Student
(Situation)
(Knowledge Transferred)

FIG 6. INTERACTION BETWEEN FACULTY & STUDENT

 The audit should identify (Fig 6) that the

object of motivating the students is

achieved or otherwise [Feed-back analysis
to be used].
Communication skill is very much
essential for motivating the students.
Outcome of curriculum audit may be
revision of curriculum as well as modality
of teaching with sustainable concept.

Other measuring tools

The results of a subject are to be

statistically analysed. Mean value +

standard deviation must lie in the range of
50 to 60% of the students strength. If the
value is lower than 50% it indicates that 1)
additional efforts are essential for
motivating the students though different
teaching styles.

PEDAGOGY
CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT
OUTCOME : Qualified Engineering graduates
CURRICULUM
DEVELOPMENT

PEDAGOGY

INTERACTION PHENOMENON

Curriculum development in functional form can be

expressed as
C.D = fn { A,B,C,D,E,F} .. (2)
Where
A = Basic Science
B = Mathematics
C = Core Subjects
D = Elective Subjects
E = Hard skill development
F = Ecology and Environment
G= Any other factor

Similarly, Pedagogy can be expressed as

P = fn { W, L,H,C,A,S } .(3)
Where
P = Pedagogy
W= Writing on board
L = Lecturing
H = Distribution of hand out
C = Use of computer [Power point, slides]
A = Understanding through assignment
S = Seminars

 Equations 2 and 3 comprises of minimum

of 6 main parameters each totally to 12

main variables. These variables vary with
individual facultys approach. These main
parameters will interact and cross-interact
among themselves. However, the time
frame available is only 8 semesters with a
maximum of 50 subjects (Including soft
skills & Hard skills oriented subjects).

The curriculum developed must be taught to a variety of

students in a particular class. The outcome seen by the
authorities are the end product viz. percentage of marks
or credit earned by a student. Whether the outgoing
student is well equipped to face societies challenges will
be totally ignored. Keeping the same variables, the
curriculum is REDESIGNED as a routine exercise by
adding technology changes and ignoring the earlier
curriculum once in 5 years. This indicates that curriculum
is in unstable equilibrium. In present scenario majority of
the engineering curriculum is having a paradiagm shifting
towards ABSTRACT (Theories, formulae, models,
concepts). The modification or revision of curriculum is
made as a routine matter without curriculum audit.

 The curriculum

is to be developed
accounting the changing scenario and
made sustainable one. Atleast for 20 to
25 years, it should not be revised. The
provision is to be made to change the
subjects only through electives.

The main and interaction effects between

various parameters shown in eqs 2 and 3 are to
be mathematically analysed. The curriculum
audit findings are to be superposed. This will
generate an engineering curriculum with
sustainability concept. The curriculum should
make the provision for self study through library
work. Role of Digital library is to be stressed and
weightage is to be given in the curriculum
development. This enhances the knowledge
base to a higher extent.

Benchmarking
Benchmarking: means

1) Self evaluation
2) Self Improvement
Self evaluation purposes:
1) To facilitate improvement Development
Change
2) To satisfy expectations and requirements
for professional accountability.

Benchmarking (BM).
Benchmarking is developed to improve the
capacity of higher education and to
demonstrate more transparent levels of
comparability.
Benchmarking has two parts :
PART1:
- BM educational process and outcomes
- BM the learning environment
- BM to improve departmental systems
- BM the students experience
- BM key Skills
- BM the outcomes of learning

Benchmarking (BM).
PART2:
- Administrative BM
- BM Students recruitment
- BM Higher education and public sector facilities
- BM the learning infrasturctue etc.

Benchmarking (BM).
BM to improve departmental systems:
1) Design of programmes of Study
2) Delivery and management of programmes of study
3) Staff-student and communication
4) Problems reporting and corrective action
5) Assessment and active standards
6) Admissions and entry standards
The Quality of the teaching and learning are central to
integrate the key skills in the program.

Core and Transferrable skills

Major problem in the conceptualization of core,
transferrable or transferrable skills.
Skills transfer are indeed from educational to work
context.
Transfer of learning occurs when the person acquires
knowledge or skills, acquired in one context into a new
context.

Learning is context embedded

Core and Transferrable skills

The modern higher education or curriculum can be

understood in terms of super imposed access, namely,

Specific discipline skills

Cross disciplinary skills
Profession specific skills
Personal transferable skills\

Work based experience and generic skills are

Interaction between disciplinary content disciplinary skills

Work place awareness work place experience
Disciplinary content work place awareness
Disciplinary skills work place experience

A T titude depends on altitude

A L titude depends on attitude
Am P litude depends on Basics

CONCLUSIONS

Engineering Curriculum is to be developed by

considering the interaction between curriculum and
pedagogy
curriculum audit is to be used as an effective tool for
further designing of curriculum
Engineering pedagogees to work as a part of transdisciplinary teaching teams.
Designed curriculum should be sustainable at least
for 25 years course content is to be designed such
that students must use digital library.
There are 32 types of learning styles and 32 types
of teaching styles.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am

thankful to authorities of School of

Engineering Technology, Jain University,
Bangalore for providing necessary
facilities for the preparation of this text.

REFERENCES

1965, Mathematical education of engineers, Report of the OECD Seminar on the

mathematical education of Engineers, Paris
Rongan Banerjee and Vinayak P. Muley (2007), Engineering education in India,
Draft final report, IIT Bombay, Powai
Daniel R. Rehak and Thomas V. Schields (1984) Design of a Pedagogical aid for
Civil Engineering Research showcase, Carnegie Mellon University
Svetlana Kudrajavtseva (2002), e-Technologies in engineering education A
case of pedadogy Development. Proc 2002, eTee Conf.11-16 Aug 2002,
Switzerland PP 107-110
Richard M felder and Linda K Silverman (1988) Learning and Teaching styles in
engineering education. 78(7), pp 674-681
Catherine E Brawner, Richard M felder and Rodney H Aller (1999) Faculty
teaching practices in an engineering education coalition, Proc. 29th ASEE/IEEE
Frontiers in Education conference, San Joun pp 1295-Nov 10-13
Nicholas A Ashford (2004) Major challenges to engineering education for
sustainable development. International Journal of Sustainability in higher
education
Shreesh P. Mysore (2010), Scientific Course design at Stanford university,
Stanford, USA
Sohrab (1996) Quality audit, Allied Publishers ltd., New Delhi.
Jagadeesha CJ and Manavalan P (2001), Benchmarking and skill development
in remote sensing and geografic information systems (RS & GIS) education,
Proceedings of national symposium on Recent advances in remote sensing for
GIS techniques for National Resouces management, December 5-7, Iit, Bombay.

THANK YOU