Enhancing ABET Summative Direct Assessment with AI and Blockchain: A Framework for Personalized Learning and Secure Evaluation

Year : 2024 | Volume :02 | Issue : 01 | Page : 28-42
By

Qutaiba I. Ali

  1. Professor Faculty Member, Department of Computer Engineering, Mosul University Mosul Iraq

Abstract

Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) emphasizes the achievement of specific measurable learning outcomes. However, conventional assessment methods often find it challenging to accurately capture the complexities of student learning and program effectiveness within the ABET framework. This study proposes a novel framework that enhances ABET summative direct assessment by integrating a carefully structured, weighted assessment system with the transformative potential of artificial intelligence (AI) and blockchain technologies. The framework leverages AI to personalize learning pathways, automate feedback generation, and drive data-driven curriculum improvement, while blockchain technology ensures secure data management, transparent grade recording, and verifiable student credentials. By grounding this integration in sound pedagogical principles and addressing ethical considerations, the proposed framework aims to create a more efficient, trustworthy, and learner-centric assessment experience that empowers both students and educators to achieve better learning outcomes. This study also describes the roadmap of the integration of AI and blockchain technologies with the ABET assessment framework which involves the examination of the practicality, efficiency, and impact of these technologies at different stages of the assessment process. Another contribution is to identify and recommend the most suitable AI and blockchain tools for effective implementation in ABET assessment. This involves a comparative analysis of available technologies, considering factors such as compatibility with ABET principles, data security, and the potential to enhance transparency, efficiency, and personalization in student assessments. We aim to reinforce the proposed approach by harnessing modern technologies in AI and advanced security measures to enhance the effectiveness, efficiency, and security of our proposed assessment framework.

Keywords: Large language model (LLMs), AI, student outcome assessment, ABET accreditation, assessment methodology, educational quality, blockchain

[This article belongs to International Journal of Algorithms Design and Analysis Review(ijadar)]

How to cite this article: Qutaiba I. Ali. Enhancing ABET Summative Direct Assessment with AI and Blockchain: A Framework for Personalized Learning and Secure Evaluation. International Journal of Algorithms Design and Analysis Review. 2024; 02(01):28-42.
How to cite this URL: Qutaiba I. Ali. Enhancing ABET Summative Direct Assessment with AI and Blockchain: A Framework for Personalized Learning and Secure Evaluation. International Journal of Algorithms Design and Analysis Review. 2024; 02(01):28-42. Available from: https://journals.stmjournals.com/ijadar/article=2024/view=0

References

  1. Ali Surveying different student outcome assessment methods for ABET accredited computer engineering programs. Research Reports on Computer Science. 2023;2:56–76. DOI: 10.37256/rrcs.2120232577.
  2. Bachnak R, Marikunte SS, Abu-Ayyad M, Shafaye A. Fundamentals of ABET accreditation with the newly approved changes. ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. Tampa, FL: American Society for Engineering Education; 2019. p.16– DOI: 10.18260/1-2–32868.
  3. Osman A, Yahya AA, Kamal MB. A benchmark collection for mapping program educational objectives to ABET student outcomes: Accreditation. In: Alenezi M, Qureshi B, editors. 5th International Symposium on Data Mining Applications. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 753. Cham: Springer; 2018. p.46– DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-78753-4_5.
  4. Cook C, Mathur P, Visconti M. Assessment of CAC self-study report. 34th Annual Frontiers in Education, 2004. FIE 2004. Savannah, GA: IEEE; 2004. p.T3G/12-T3G/17. DOI: 1109/FIE.2004.1408546.
  5. Hussain Khan IH. A unified framework for systematic evaluation of ABET student outcomes and program educational objectives. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science. 2019;11:1– DOI: 10.5815/ijmecs.2019.11.01.
  6. Ahmad N, Qahmash A. Implementing fuzzy AHP and FUCOM to evaluate critical success factors for sustained academic quality assurance and ABET accreditation. PLOS ONE. 2020;15. DOI: 1371/journal.pone.0239140. PubMed: 32941488.
  7. Alhakami HH, Al-Masabi BA, Alsubait TM. Data analytics of student learning outcomes using ABET course files. In: Arai K, Kapoor S, Bhatia R, editors. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. SAI 2020, Vol. Cham: Springer; 2020. p.309–325. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-52249-0_22.
  8. Dawood MZ, Buragga KA, Khan AR, Zaman N. Rubric based assessment plan implementation for computer science program: A practical approach. Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering (TALE). Bali, Indonesia: IEEE; 2013. p.551– DOI: 10.1109/TALE.2013.6654498.
  9. Schoepp K, Danaher M, Kranov AA. The computing professional skills assessment: An innovative method for assessing ABET’s student outcomes. 2016 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON). Abu Dhabi: IEEE; 2016. p.45– DOI: 10.1109/EDUCON.2016.7474529.
  10. Hussain W, Spady WG, Naqash MT, Khan SZ, Khawaja BA, Conner L. Navigating ABET accreditation during and after COVID-19 – Navigating the digital age. IEEE Access. 2020;8:218997– DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3041736.
  11. Karimi A, Manteufel RD. Preparation of documents for ABET accreditation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Proceedings of the ASEE 2021 Gulf-Southwest Annual Conference. Waco, TX: American Society for Engineering Education; 2021. p.1-9. https://peer.asee.org/36394. DOI: 10.18260/1-2–36394.
  12. Mohamed O, Bitar Z, Abu-Sultaneh A, Elhaija WA. A simplified virtual power system lab for distance learning and ABET accredited education systems. International Journal of Electrical Engineering & Education. 2023;60:397– DOI: 10.1177/0020720921997064.
  13. Essa E, Dittrich A, Dascalu S. ACAT: A web-based software tool to facilitate course assessment for ABET accreditation. Seventh International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations. Las Vegas, NV: IEEE; 2010. p.88– DOI: 10.1109/ITNG.2010.224.
  14. Lam WWM, Xie H, Liu DYW, Yung KWH. Investigating online collaborative learning on students’ learning outcomes in higher education. Proceedings of the 2019 3rd International Conference on Education and E-Learning. New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery; 2019. p.13– DOI: 10.1145/3371647.3371656.
  15. Cabezas I. On combining gamification theory and ABET criteria for teaching and learning engineering. IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). El Paso, TX: IEEE; 2015. p.1-9. DOI: 1109/FIE.2015.7344111.
  16. McKenzie FD, Mielke RR, Leathrum JF. A successful EAC-ABET accredited undergraduate program in modeling and simulation engineering (M&SE). Winter Simulation Conference (WSC). Huntington Beach, CA: IEEE; 2015. p.3538– DOI: 10.1109/WSC.2015.7408513.
  17. Peridier A faculty-directed continuous improvement regimen with intentional ABET/SO 1-7 scaffolding. In: ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access. American Society for Engineering Education; 2020. p.1–17. DOI: 10.18260/1-2–34000.
  18. Zambrano C. Continuous improvement model to systematize curricular processes in the context of ABET accreditation. In: Arabnia H, Deligiannidis L, Tinetti FG, Tran QN, editors. Proceedings of the International Conference on Frontiers in Education: Computer Science and Computer Engineering (FECS). Las Vegas: CSREA Press; 2019. p.88–93.
  19. Rathy GA, Sivasankar P, Gnanasambandhan TG. Developing a knowledge structure using outcome based education in power electronics engineering. Procedia Computer Science. 2020;172:1026– DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2020.05.150.
  20. Lavanya C, Murthy JN, Kosaraju S. Assessment practices in outcome-based education: Evaluation drives education. Methodologies and Outcomes of Engineering and Technological Pedagogy. USA: IGI Global; 2020. p.50– DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-2245-5.
  21. Manzoor A, Aziz H, Jahanzaib M, Wasim A, Hussain S. Transformational model for engineering education from content-based to outcome-based education. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning. 2017;27:266– DOI: 10.1504/IJCEELL.2017.087136.
  22. Min B, Ross H, Sulem E, Veyseh APB, Nguyen TH, Sainz O, Agirre E, Heintz I, Roth D. Recent advances in natural language processing via large pre-trained language models: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys. 2024;56:1– DOI: 10.1145/3605943.
  23. Aydın Ö. Google Bard generated literature review: Metaverse. Journal of AI. 2023;7:1– DOI: 10.61969/jai.1311271.
Regular Issue Subscription Review Article
Volume 02
Issue 01
Received May 23, 2024
Accepted June 6, 2024
Published June 29, 2024
Views: 12

function myFunction2() {
var x = document.getElementById(“browsefigure”);
if (x.style.display === “block”) {
x.style.display = “none”;
}
else { x.style.display = “Block”; }
}
document.querySelector(“.prevBtn”).addEventListener(“click”, () => {
changeSlides(-1);
});
document.querySelector(“.nextBtn”).addEventListener(“click”, () => {
changeSlides(1);
});
var slideIndex = 1;
showSlides(slideIndex);
function changeSlides(n) {
showSlides((slideIndex += n));
}
function currentSlide(n) {
showSlides((slideIndex = n));
}
function showSlides(n) {
var i;
var slides = document.getElementsByClassName(“Slide”);
var dots = document.getElementsByClassName(“Navdot”);
if (n > slides.length) { slideIndex = 1; }
if (n (item.style.display = “none”));
Array.from(dots).forEach(
item => (item.className = item.className.replace(” selected”, “”))
);
slides[slideIndex – 1].style.display = “block”;
dots[slideIndex – 1].className += ” selected”;
}