OBE System Explanations – An Implementation of Cognitive Domain on Theory Course
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61194/education.v3i3.273Keywords:
Cognitive Domain, Course Outcome, Outcome-Based Education, Program Outcome, Threshold Value of Course OutcomeAbstract
This research explains the OBE (Outcome-Based Education) system by implementing cognitive domain levels in the geotechnical engineering theory course. For this reason, the two program outcomes (POs) are proposed to evaluate the performance of students by achieving the threshold value of course outcome (TVCO) to obtain marks of individual course outcome (CO) considered for the mid-term and final exams. The minimum 70 % mark obtained in an individual CO is considered for achieving the TVCO according to the grade point values of the grading system. Most students are not achieving TVCO because of improper knowledge of pre-requisite courses, the lower voice of the teacher, absent minds of students during class, lack of practice on complex problems at home, etc. So, some remedial measures are taken to overcome these limitations such as mandatory to compete for the pre-requisite courses before taking the relevant higher level course, using a mouth-piece to increase the voice of the teacher, sharing some interesting issues with students to remove absent mind, try to more practice by proper utilizing time in home, etc. However, there is a scope to enhance this research in the future by applying other domains of the OBE system to the theory and lab courses.
References
A, M.-A. (2014). Towards OBE: A Case Study of Course Outcome (CO) and Programme Outcome (PO) Attainment for Product Design and Development Course. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education (IOSRJRME, 4(2), 55–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9790/7388-04235561
Akir, O., Eng, T. H., & Malie, S. (n.d.). Teaching and Learning Enhancement Through Outcome-Based Education Structure and Technology e-Learning Support. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 62, 87–92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.015
Andersen, J. P., Degn, L., Fishberg, R., Graversen, E. K., Horbach, S. P. J. M., Schmidt, E. K., Schneider, J. W., & Sørensen, M. P. (2025). Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) in the research process – A survey of researchers’ practices and perceptions. Technology in Society, 81, 102813. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2025.102813
B.A.E.T.E. (2022). Accreditation Manual for Undergraduate Engineering Programs.
Bergdahl, N., & Sjöberg, J. (2025). Attitudes, perceptions and AI self-efficacy in K-12 education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100358. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100358
Brunner, M., Stallasch, S. E., Artelt, C., & Lüdtke, O. (2025). An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis to Support Power Analyses for Randomized Intervention Studies in Preschool: Cognitive and Socio-Emotional Learning Outcomes. Educational Psychology Review, 37(1), 6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09981-z
Castro, V. de, Martín-Peña, M. L., Martínez, E. M., & Salgado, M. (2025). Combining Action Research With Design Science as a Qualitative Research Methodology. An Application to Service (Operations) Management Research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069241312018
Chan, A., & Chan, C. (2009). A new outcome‐based curriculum: its impact on student core competence. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 1(2), 24–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/17581184200900011
Chernikova, O., Sommerhoff, D., Stadler, M., Holzberger, D., Nickl, M., Seidel, T., Kasneci, E., Küchemann, S., Kuhn, J., Fischer, F., & Heitzmann, N. (2025). Personalization through adaptivity or adaptability? A meta-analysis on simulation-based learning in higher education. Educational Research Review, 46, 100662. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100662
Clark, D. B., Scott, D., DiPasquale, J. P., & Becker, S. (2024). Reframing design in education: Proposing a framework to support pre-service teachers in adopting designerly stances. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 33(4–5), 613–666. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2024.2397762
dr. preeti Oza, & J, D. G. P. (2021). Curriculum and Evaluation in Outcome-Based Education. Psychology and Education Journal, 58(2), 5620–5625. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17762/pae.v58i2.2982
Duff, M., Glazer, J. L., Shirrell, M., & Freed, D. (2024). Walking a Tightrope: Navigating Principal-Agent Dilemmas in Research-Practice Partnerships. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 46(4), 709–734. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737231188366
Fagerlund, J., Palsa, L., & Mertala, P. (2025). Exploration of domains of educational purpose in K-12 data literacy education research. Educational Research Review, 46, 100663. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100663
Farrokhnia, M., Noroozi, O., Baggen, Y., Biemans, H., & Weinberger, A. (2025). Improving hybrid brainstorming outcomes with computer-supported scaffolds: Prompts and cognitive group awareness. Computers & Education, 227, 105229. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105229
Fuller, S. C., Swiderski, T., Mikkelsen, C., & Bastian, K. C. (2024). In School, Engaged, on Track? The Effect of the Pandemic on Student Attendance, Course Grades, and Grade Retention in North Carolina. Educational Researcher. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X241299397
Gorman, A., & Hall, K. (2024). Exploring the impact of an online learning community to support student teachers on school placement. European Journal of Teacher Education, 47(5), 1056–1072. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2023.2232943
Grønli, K. M., Walgermo, B. R., McTigue, E. M., & Uppstad, P. H. (2025). Feedback Practices on Young Students. A Systematic Review. Review of Educational Research. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543241306070
Hadden, I. R., Harris, P. R., & Easterbrook, M. J. (2025). Context matters: Diagnosing and targeting local barriers to success at school. Journal of School Psychology, 108, 101401. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2024.101401
Hoque, M. (2016). Three Domains of Learning: Cognitive, Affective and Psychomotor. Journal of EFL Education and Research (JEFLER, 2(2), 45–52.
Hwang, G.-J., & Chang, C.-C. (2024). A self-determination theory-based digital gaming approach to enhancing EFL learners’ competence in applying professional English. Educational Technology Research and Development. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10445-y
Jenssen, E. S., & Haara, F. O. (2024). High-quality practicum – according to teacher education students on their practicum at partnership schools. European Journal of Teacher Education, 47(5), 876–894. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2024.2370892
Jesús, A., Armando, K., & Claudia, D. (2012). Perceived cognitive, affective and psychomotor learning in a blended course in higher education. Proceedings of EDULEARN12 Conference, 6213–6220.
Karta, I. W., Farmasari, S., & Ocampo, D. M. (2023). Online Assessment of Primary Students’ Cognitive, Psychomotor, and Affective Domains: Practices from Urban and Rural Primary Schools in Indonesia. SHS Web of Conferences, 173, 1014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202317301014
Kinder, A., Briese, F. J., Jacobs, M., Dern, N., Glodny, N., Jacobs, S., & Leßmann, S. (2025). Effects of adaptive feedback generated by a large language model: A case study in teacher education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100349. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100349
König, L., Zitzmann, S., Fütterer, T., Campos, D. G., Scherer, R., & Hecht, M. (2024). An evaluation of the performance of stopping rules in AI ‐aided screening for psychological meta‐analytical research. Research Synthesis Methods, 15(6), 1120–1146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1762
Krieglstein, F., Beege, M., Wesenberg, L., Rey, G. D., & Schneider, S. (2025). The Distorting Influence of Primacy Effects on Reporting Cognitive Load in Learning Materials of Varying Complexity. Educational Psychology Review, 37(1), 2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09980-0
Landers, M. (2025). Adapting to the Unsanctioned Use of AI-Supported Technologies in Student Assessments. Higher Education for the Future, 12(1), 76–96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/23476311241300608
Li, Q., Moallem, M., Boettinger, J., Cai, Q., & Levi, M. (2024). An educational model of equity and computing: a study of marginalized student experience during COVID pandemic. Educational Technology Research and Development. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10443-0
Ma, T. (2025). Systematically visualizing ChatGPT used in higher education: Publication trend, disciplinary domains, research themes, adoption and acceptance. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100336. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100336
Mah, D.-K., & Groß, N. (2024). Artificial intelligence in higher education: exploring faculty use, self-efficacy, distinct profiles, and professional development needs. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1), 58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00490-1
Malisić, B., Tinaj, S., Popović, J., Lukovac, L., & Vlačić, B. (2025). Internal dynamics and innovation: A cross-disciplinary review and future research agenda. Technology in Society, 81, 102773. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102773
Motohashi, K., Ikeuchi, K., & Kwon, S. (2025). Impact of national university patenting on innovation: Researcher analysis in Japan. Technology in Society, 81, 102806. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102806
Nguyen, H., Nguyen, V., Ludovise, S., & Santagata, R. (2025). Value‐sensitive design of chatbots in environmental education: Supporting identity, connectedness, well‐being and sustainability. British Journal of Educational Technology. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13568
Osman, S. A., Omar, M. Z. , Mat, K., & Kofli, N. T. (2009). Outcome Based Education (OBE) Curriculum Assessment for Industrial Training Program: Based on Students’ Perception. .
Santilli, T., Ceccacci, S., Mengoni, M., & Giaconi, C. (2025). Virtual vs. traditional learning in higher education: A systematic review of comparative studies. Computers & Education, 227, 105214. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105214
Schellekens, L. H., Schaaf, M. F., Baartman, L. K. J., Vleuten, C. P. M., Kremer, W. D. J., & Bok, H. G. J. (2024). Students’ perceptions of the assessment programme’s impact on self-regulated learning: a multiple-case study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 49(8), 1074–1090. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2343317
Strat, T. T. S., Henriksen, E. K., & Jegstad, K. M. (2024). Inquiry-based science education in science teacher education: a systematic review. Studies in Science Education, 60(2), 191–249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2023.2207148
Tan, X., Cheng, G., & Ling, M. H. (2025). Artificial intelligence in teaching and teacher professional development: A systematic review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100355. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100355
Vágvölgyi, R., Bergström, K., Bulajić, A., Rüsseler, J., Fernandes, T., Grosche, M., Klatte, M., Huettig, F., & Lachmann, T. (2025). The cognitive profile of adults with low literacy skills in alphabetic orthographies: A systematic review and comparison with developmental dyslexia. Educational Research Review, 46, 100659. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100659
Valeri, F., Nilsson, P., & Cederqvist, A.-M. (2025). Exploring students’ experience of ChatGPT in STEM education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100360. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100360
Wesenberg, L., Jansen, S., Krieglstein, F., Schneider, S., & Rey, G. D. (2025). The influence of seductive details in learning environments with low and high extrinsic motivation. Learning and Instruction, 96, 102054. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.102054
Woods, P. J., Matuk, C., DesPortes, K., Vacca, R., Tes, M., Vasudevan, V., & Amato, A. (2024). Reclaiming the right to look: making the case for critical visual literacy and data science education. Critical Studies in Education, 65(5), 441–459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2023.2298198
Yasmin, F., Farooq, M. U., & Shah, S. K. (2023). Impact of Exam-Oriented Education System on Undergraduate Students’ Cognitive, Affective and Psychomotor Competencies. International Journal of Linguistics and Culture, 4(1), 109–125. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52700/ijlc.v4i1.180
Yeh, C., Reinholz, D. L., Lee, H. H., & Moschetti, M. (2025). Beyond Verbal: A Methodological Approach to Highlighting Students. In Embodied Participation in Mathematics Classroom. Educational Researcher. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X241310169
Zeynal, H., Zakaria, Z., Anisseh, M., & Mansoorzadeh, S. (2017). Strategic implementation of outcome-based education system in Buein-Zahra Technical University of Iran. 2017 IEEE 9th International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED, 122–127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEED.2017.8251178
Zhang, Q., & Fiorella, L. (2024). Effects of self-explaining feedback on learning from problem-solving errors. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 79, 102326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2024.102326
Zulfadli, Mokhtar, S. A., Puteh, S., & Anuar, S. M. S. (2014). OBE Measurement System in Malaysian Institute of Information Technology Universiti Kuala Lumpur. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMS.2014.10
