SELF ASSESSMENT REPORT (SAR)

TIER - II UG Engineering Programs

First Time Accreditation

Dr. J.N. Jha

Principal
MIT, Muzaffarpur
Criteria No. Criteria Weightage /Marks
PART B - CRITERIA SUMMARY
Programme level Criteria
1. Vision, Mission and Program Educational 60
Objectives
2. Program Curriculum and Teaching – Learning 120
Processes
3. Course Outcomes and Program Outcomes 120
4. Students’ Performance 150
5. Faculty Information and Contributions 200
6. Facilities and Technical Support 80
7. Continuous Improvement 50
Institute Level Criteria
8. First Year Academics 50
9. Student Support Systems 50
10. Governance, Institutional Support and 120
Financial Resources
CRITERION Students’
150
4 Performance
 Abbreviations used
CAY – Current Academic Year
CAYm1- Current Academic Year
minus 1= Current Assessment Year
CAYm2 - Current Academic Year
minus 2 = Current Assessment Year
minus 1
 LYG – Last Year Graduate
 LYGm1 – Last Year Graduate minus 1
 LYGm2 – Last Year Graduate minus 2
 4.1. Enrolment Ratio (20)
Enrolment Ratio = Total students admitted in Ist yr
/Sanctioned intake of program
Avg. Student enrollment at First Year Marks
Level during prev. 3 acad. yrs incl CAY)
>= 90% students 20
>= 80% students 18
>= 70% students 16
>= 60% students 14
>= 50% students 12/0
Otherwise 0
 Admission intake in the programme
Item CAY CAY1 CAY2 CAY3

Sanctioned intake strength in the

programme (N) 120 120 120 120
Total number of admitted students in
first year minus number of students
migrated to other programmes at the
end of 1st year (N1) 120 120 120 120
Number of admitted students in 2nd - 24 23 17
year in the same batch via lateral entry
(N2)
Total number of admitted students in 120 144 143 137
the Programme
(N1 + N2)
4.2. Success Rate in stipulated period of the
program (40)/(20)
4.2.1. Success rate without backlogs in any
semester/year of study (25)/(15)
SI = (Number of students graduated from program
without backlog)/ (Number of students admitted in
first year of that batch and 2nd year via lateral
entry/separate Div)
Average SI = Mean of Success Index (SI) for past
three batches
Success rate without backlogs in any year of study
= 25(15) × Average SI
 Success Rate = 25 × mean of success index (SI) for
past three batches
Year of entry Number of students admitted No. of students who
(reverse in 1st year + admitted via successfully completed
chronological lateral entry in 2nd year (Zero backlog)
order) (N1+N2)
1st 2nd 3rd 4th
year year year year
CAY 120
CAYm1 144 80
CAYm2 143 53 84
CAYm3 137 80 57 102
CAYm4 (LYG) 144 44 81 92 119
CAYm5(LYGm1) 108 39 29 71 94
CAYm6(LYGm2) 105 57 31 16 85
 Success Index (SI)=
No. of students graduated in stipulated Period/
No. of students admitted in 1st year and 2nd year
Success Rate = 25 × Average SI= 25 ×0.84= 21

Item LYG LYGm1 LYGm2

(CAYm4) (CAYm5) (CAYm6)

Number of students admitted in the 144 108 105

corresponding First Year + admitted via lateral
entry in 2nd year
Number of students who have graduated in the 119 94 85
stipulated period

Success index (SI) 0.83 0.87 0.81

4.2.2. Success rate with Backlog in
stipulated period (15)/(5)
SI= (No. of students graduated from program
in stipulated period of course duration)/ (No.
of students admitted in first year of that
batch + 2nd year via lateral entry)
Avg SI = mean of Success Index (SI) for past 3
batches
Success rate = 15(5) × Average SI
Note: If 100% students clear without any backlog,
then total marks are 40(20) as both 4.2.1 & 4.2.2 will
be applicable simultaneously
Success Rate with backlog in stipulated period
Success Rate = 15 × Average SI= 15 ×0.84= 12.6

Success
Item Rate = 15 × Average SI = 15LYG
×0.84=LYGm1
12.6 LYGm2
Note: If 100% students clear without (CAYm4) (CAYm5) then
any backlog (CAYm6)
also total
Number marksadmitted
of students scoredin will
the be 40 144 108 105
corresponding First Year + admitted via lateral
entry in 2nd year
Number of students who have graduated with 119 94 85
backlog in the stipulated period

Success index (SI) 0.83 0.87 0.81

4.3. Academic Performance in 3rd Year (15)/(0)
Academic Performance = 1.5 * Average API
(Academic Performance Index)
API = {Mean of 3rd Year Grade Point Avg of all
successful Students on a 10 point scale
OR
Mean of % of marks of all successful students in 3rd
Year/10} x
(__no. of successful students___)
(no. of students appeared in exam)
Successful students: those permitted to proceed to Final
year
 Academic Performance of 3rd year= 1.5 ×Av. API
Item LYG LYGm1 LYGm2
(CAYm4) (CAYm5) (CAYm6)
Approximating the API by the following mid-point analysis (API by Mid-CGPA)
9 < Number of students with CGPA < 10.0 0 0 0
8 < Number of students with CGPA < 9.0 11 4 0
7<=8 47 32 21
6<=7 61 56 64
5<=6 0 2 0
Mean of CGPA or Mean Percentage of students (X) 7.1 6.9 6,7
Total no. of successful students (Y) 119 94 85
Total no. of students appeared in the examination (Z) 144 108 105
API = x* (Y/Z) 5.86 6.05 5.42
Average API = (AP1 + AP2 + AP3)/3 5.77
Academic Performance 1.5× 5.77=8.65
4.4. Academic Performance in 2nd Yr (15)/(10)
Academic Performance Level = 1.5 * Average
API (Academic Performance Index)
API = {Mean of 2nd Year Grade Point Avg of
all successful Students on a 10 point scale
OR
Mean of % of marks of all successful
students in Second Year/10} x
(__no. of successful students__)
(no. of students appeared in exam)
Successful students: permitted to proceed to
3rd year 14
Academic Performance of 2nd year= 1.5 ×Av. API
Item LYG LYGm1 LYGm2
(CAYm4) (CAYm5) (CAYm6)
Approximating the API by the following mid-point analysis (API by Mid-CGPA)
9 < Number of students with CGPA < 10.0 0 0 0
8 < Number of students with CGPA < 9.0 11 4 0
7<=8 47 32 21
6<=7 61 56 64
5<=6 0 2 0
Mean of CGPA or Mean Percentage of students (X) 7.1 6.9 6,7
Total no. of successful students (Y) 119 94 85
Total no. of students appeared in the examination (Z) 144 108 105
API = x* (Y/Z) 5.86 6.05 5.42
Average API = (AP1 + AP2 + AP3)/3 5.77
Academic Performance 1.5× 5.77=8.65
4.5. Placement, Higher Studies, Entrepreneurship
(40)/(30)
Assessment Points = 40 or 30 × average placement
Item CAYm1 CAYm2 CAYm3

Total No. of Final Yr Students (N)

Students placed in companies/Govt. Sector
(x)
Students admitted to higher studies with
valid qualifying scores (GATE/ equivalent
State/National Level Tests, GRE, GMAT etc.)
(y)
Students turned entrepreneur in engg/tech
(z)
x+y+z=
Placement Index : (x + y + z )/N P1 P2 P3
16

Average placement=(P1+P2+P3)/3
 Placement, Higher Studies and Entrepreneurship
Item LYG LYGm1 LYGm2
(CAYm4) (CAYm5) (CAYm6)
Total No. of Final Year Students (N) 144 108 105
No. of students placed in companies or Govt. 20 17 42
Sector (x)
No. of students admitted to higher studies with 21 30 13
valid qualifying scores (GATE or equivalent State
or National Level Tests, GRE, GMAT etc.) (y)
No. of students turned entrepreneur in engg./ 24 25 28
tech. (z)
x+y+z= 65 72 83
Placement Index : (x + y + z )/N 0.45 0.67 0.79
Average placement= (P1 + P2 + P3)/3 0.64
Assessment Points = 40 × average placement 25.47
 Placement data format
Programs name with Assessment Year

S. Name of the Enrollment Name of Appointment

N. student Placed Number the Letter reference
employer No. with date
4.6. Professional Activities (20)
4.6.1. Professional societies/ chapters organizing engineering
events (5)
• Relevant details
-Availability/activities of Professional Society/ Chapters (3)
- No./ Quality of Engg. events organized at Institute (2)

4.6.2. Publication of tech magazines, newsletters, etc. (5)

•Department shall list publications with names of editors/
publishers, etc
- Quality/relevance of contents/print material (3)
- Participation of students from the program (2)
4.6.3 Participation in inter-institute events
by students of program (10)
•Provide a table indicating publications
which received awards in events /
conferences organized by other institutes
Within the State (2)
Outside the State (3)
Prized/Awards received (5)
 Professional societies/chapters and organizing
engineering events
Year of Event Student Details Organised
Entry Name by
Name Position
CAYm1 Structure Suraj Kakkar 2nd ISTE, MIT
Master Ram Kakkar
Akshay Kaushal

CAYm2 Project & Akshay Kaushal 1st IE Student

Model Chapter,
Display MIT
CAYm3 Truss-O- Suraj Kakkar 1st ACES, MIT
Build Ram Kakkar
Publication of technical magazines, newsletters, etc.
Year Title of the Student detail Editor Magazine/
Article Newsletter
CAY Recycled Akshay kaushal, JN Jha, Proceedings
Concrete Danish Malhotra, Harvinder of GEPSID-
aggregate: A Jaspreet Singh, Singh, 2014-national
Solid Wealth Leezu Goyal, Vivek Preetinder conference,
Makkar Kaur October 11-
12, 2014,
Ludhiana

CAYm1 Properties of self Abhinandan Singh K.Prasad College

compacting Magazine
concrete mixed
with fly ash

CAYm2 Funny Prabhjot Balwinder College News

Definitions SinghDindsa Singh Letter
Participation in the Inter Institute events by the
students of the Program of the study
Year of Event Student Details Organised
Entry Name by
Name Position
CAYm1 Structure Suraj Kakkar 2nd IITISM
Master Ram Kakkar Dhanbad
Akshay Kaushal

CAYm2 Project & Akshay Kaushal 1st IITPatna

Model
Display
CAYm3 Truss-O- Suraj Kakkar 1st NIT Patna
Build Ram Kakkar
 Faculty
CRITERION Information
200
5 and
Contributions
 Name of Faculty
Degree
(highest degree)
University
Year of Graduation
QUALIFICATION

Association with Institution

Designation
Date of Joining institution
Department
Specialization
Research Paper Publications

CAY, CAYm1 & CAYm2 Ph.D. Guidance

Faculty Receiving Ph.D.
Research
Academic

during Assessment Yrs

Sponsored Research
(Funded Research)
Consultancy & Product
Cumulative information for dept faculty for

Development
5.1. Student-Faculty Ratio (SFR) (20)
(CALCULATED AT DEPT LEVEL CONSIDERING ALL
UG/PG PROGRAMS)
No. of UG Programs in the Department (n): __________
No. of PG Programs in the Department (m): __________
No. of Students in UG 2nd Year= u1
No. of Students in UG 3rd Year= u2 Except UG 1st yr
No. of Students in UG 4th Year= u3
No. of Students in PG 1st Year= p1
No. of Students in PG 2nd Year= p2
No. of Students =Sanctioned Intake+ Actual admitted lat. entry
S=TOTAL STUDENTS IN DEPT = u1+..+un+p1+..pn
F = TOTAL FACULTY IN DEPT (excl first year faculty)
STUDENT FACULTY RATIO (SFR) = S / F
 Regular vs Contract Faculty
Regular/ full time faculty >= 75%
Contractual/Adjunct Faculty/Resource
persons from industry as per AICTE norms
and standards <= 25%
Contractual faculty considered for assessment
only if:
-drawing salary as per concerned State Govt.
for contractual faculty in respective cadre
-taught over consecutive 4 semesters
Information about the regular and contractual
faculty
Year Total number of regular Total number of
faculty in contractual
the department faculty in the department
CAY

CAYm1

CAYm2
Marks: Student Faculty Ratio (SFR)
SFR Marks
< = 15 20
< = 17 18
< = 19 16
< = 21 14
< = 23 12
< = 25 10
> 25.0 0
 Marks: Student Faculty Ratio (SFR)
Year CAY CAYm1 CAYm2
No. of students in the 2nd year of the 144 145 146
Program (u1)
No. of students in the 3rd year of the 145 144 146
Program (u2)
No. of students in the 4th year of the 73 72 54
Program (u3)
Total No. of students in the department 362 363 344
(S) = u1+u2+u3
Total No. of faculty in the department (F) 19 18 19

Student Faculty Ratio (SFR) = S/F 19.05 20.16 18.10

Average SFR = (SFR1+SFR2+SFR3)/3 19.10
Assessment 16
5.2. Faculty Cadre Proportion (25)/(20)
Reference Faculty cadre proportion is 1(F1):2(F2):6(F3)
F1: No. of Prof REQUIRED = 1/9 x No. of Faculty
req to comply with 15:1 SFR based on no. of
students (S) as per 5.1

F2: No. of Assoc. Prof REQUIRED = 2/9 x No. of

Faculty req to comply with 15:1 SFR based on no.
of students (S) as per 5.1

F3: No. of Asst. Prof REQUIRED = 6/9 x No. of

Faculty req to comply with 15:1 SFR based on no.
of students (S) as per 5.1
 Professors Associate Assistant
Professors Professors

Available
Required

Required

Available
Available
Required
Year

F1
F1

F2

F3

F3
F2
CAY
CAYm1
CAYm2
Average
Numbers RF1= AF1= RF2= AF2= RF3= AF3=
Cadre Proportion Marks =
AF1 AF2x 0.6 AF3 x 0.4
RF1 + RF2 + RF3 x 12.5
or (10)
 If AF1 = AF2= 0 then zero marks
 Maximum marks limited to 25 (20)
Example: Intake = 180; Req no. of Faculty= 12;
RF1 = 1, RF2 = 2 and RF3 = 9
Case 1: AF1/RF1= 1; AF2/RF2 = 1; AF3/RF3 = 1;
Cadre proportion marks = (1+0.6+0.4) x12.5 = 25

Case 2: AF1/RF1= 1; AF2/RF2 = 3/2; AF3/RF3 = 1;

Cadre proportion marks = (1+0.9+0.4) x12.5 = 28.75 (=25)
Case 3: AF1/RF1=0; AF2/RF2=1; AF3/RF3=18/9;
Cadre proportion marks = (0+0.6+0.8) x12.5 =17.5
5.3. Faculty Qualification (25)/(20)
FQ =2.5 x [(10X + 6Y)/F)]
Where:
- X is no. of regular faculty with Ph.D.
- Y is no. of regular faculty with M.Tech.
- F is no. of regular faculty required to
comply 1:20 FSR
(Avg of CAY to CAYm2)
(no. of faculty and no. of students required
are to be calculated as per 5.1)
 Faculty qualification
Years X Y F FQ=2.5 x [(10X +4Y)/F)]

CAY 3 12 19 10.26

CAYm1 4 11 18 11.67

CAYm2 5 10 19 11.84

Average Assessment 11.26

 Faculty Retention (25) :
No. of Regular Faculty in CAYm2: CAYm1: CAY
Item (% of faculty retained during the period of assessment keeping Mark
CAYm3 as base year) s
>=90% of required Faculty members retained during the period of 25
assessment keeping CAYm3 as base year)
>=75% of required Faculty members retained during the period of 20
assessment keeping CAYm3 as base year)

>=60% of required Faculty members retained during the period of 15

assessment keeping CAYm3 as base year)

>=50% of required Faculty members retained during the period of 10

assessment keeping CAYm3 as base year)

<50% of required Faculty members retained during the period of 0

assessment keeping CAYm3 as base year)
5.5. Innovations by Faculty in Teaching
& Learning (20)/(10)
INNOVATIONS by Faculty in teaching and
learning contributing to improvement of
student learning may include but not limited
to-
• Use of ICT
• Instruction delivery
• Instructional methods
• Assessment / Evaluation
•Inclusive Class Room leading to effective,
efficient, and engaging instruction
Any contributions to teaching and learning
should satisfy the following criteria:
 Work must be available on Institute website
(4)/(2)
 Work must be available for peer review/
critique (4)/(2)
 Work must be reproducible for further
development by other scholars (2)/(2)
 Statement of clear goals, use of appropriate
methods, significance of results, effective
presentation (10)/(4)
Dept/inst. may set up appropriate processes for
making the contributions available to the public,
getting them reviewed and for rewarding
5.5. Faculty competencies in correlation
to Program Specific Criteria (0)/(10)
Correlate program specific criteria to
competencies of faculty with respect to:
• Specialization
• Research publications
• Course developments
• Other relevant points
Faculty competency Correlation to Program Specific
Criteria

Faculty Course Specialization Publication Course Consul- Special Class

Taught development tancy for Comp.
Exam
A ABC PQR 30 Member BOS Struc. GATE
Design.
5.6. Faculty as participants in Faculty
development/training activities/STTPs (15)
• Faculty scores max five points for participation
• Participation in 2 to 5 days FDP: 3 Points
• Participation >5 days FDP: 5 points
Maximum 5 per Faculty
Name of Faculty
CAY CAYm1 CAYm2
… … …

… … …

… … …
Sum
RF = No. of Faculty required to
comply with 20:1 SFR as per 5.1
Assessment = 3 × (Sum/0.5RF)
(Marks limited to 15)
Avg assessment over 3 yrs (Marks limited to 15) =
 Faculty as participants in Faculty training /STTPs
Faculty Name Max. 5/Faculty

CAYm CAYm CAYm

1 2 3
A1 5 5 5
A2 5 5 5
.. 5 5 5
An 5 5 5
Sum 65 67 67
RF= Number of Faculty required to comply 18 19 19
with 20:1 Student-Faculty ratio as per 5.1
Assessment = 3 × (Sum/0.5RF) 21.67 21.16 21.16
(Marks limited to 15) (15) (15) (15)

Average assessment over three years (Marks limited to 15

15) =
5.7. Research and Development (30)
5.7.1. Academic Research (10)
Includes research paper publications, Ph.D.
guidance & faculty receiving Ph.D. during
assessment period
• No. of quality publications in refereed
/SCI Journals, citations, Books/ Book
Chapters etc. (6)
• Ph.D. guided /Ph.D. awarded during
assessment period while working in
institute (4)
5.7.2. SPONSORED RESEARCH (5)
Funded research from outside-
Cumulative during last 3 years

Tier II
Amount (in lacs) Marks

> 20 5
16-20 4
12-16 3
8-12 2
4-8 1
<4 0
 Documentary Evidence
Year- CAYm1

Faculty Funding Amount Project Project Name Status Outcome

Name Agency & Type
Duration

ABC AICTE, 10 lakh, RPS Stability of Completed Ph.D.-1

N.Delhi 2014- Reinforced M.Tech.-3
2016 Fly ash Slope SCI Journal -3
Other Journal-
02
Int. Conf.-3
Nation al Conf.
-3
Research
Award-1
Patent-1
 5.7.3. Development activities (10)

Year Product Research Instructional Working

Development laboratories materials models/
charts/monog
rams etc.
CAYm1 03 04 05 02

CAYm2 05 03 02 07

CAYm3 03 04 04 08
5.7.4. CONSULTANCY (FROM INDUSTRY) (5) Cumulative
during last 3 years

Tier II
Amount (in lacs) Marks

> 10 5
8-10 4
6-8 3
4-6 2
2-4 1
<2 0
 Consultancy (Industry)
Year- CAYm1
Faculty Project Title Funding Amou Duration Status & Outcome
Name Agency nt (F. Year)
A CBR Value PWD 2.0 lac 2016-17 Completed, Report
of soil (B&R) Submitted
Year- CAYm2
Faculty Project Title Funding Amou Duration
Name Agency nt (F. Year)
A CBR Value PWD 2.0 lac 2016-17
of soil (B&R)
Year- CAYm3
Faculty Project Title Funding Amou Duration
Name Agency nt (F. Year)
A CBR Value PWD 2.0 lac 2016-17
of soil (B&R)
5.8. Faculty Performance Appraisal and
Development System (FPADS) (30)
The assessment is based on:
• A well-defined system for faculty appraisal
for all assessment years (10)
 Notified performance appraisal and
development system;
 Appraisal Parameters;
 Awareness
• Its implementation & effectiveness (20)
 Implementation,
 Transparency and
 Effectiveness
5.9. Visiting/Adjunct/Emeritus Faculty (10)
Adjunct faculty includes Industry experts.
Participation & contributions in teaching &
learning and/or research by visiting /adjunct/
Emeritus faculty etc.
• Provision of inviting visiting/adjunct
/Emeritus faculty (1)
• Minimum 50 hours per year interaction with
adjunct faculty from industry/retired
professors etc. (9)
Minimum 50 hours interaction = 3 marks for
that year; 3 marks x 3 years = 9 marks
 CRITERION Facilities and Technical
6 Support
80
6.1. Adequate and well equipped labs & technical
manpower (30)
A. Adequate well-equipped labs to run all program-
specific curriculum (20)
B. Availability of qualified & adequate technical
support staff (10)
S Nam No. of Name Weekly Technical Manpower
N e of Students of utilization
Name of Desig Qualific
Lab per setup import status
technical natio -ation
(Batch ant (all
staff n
size) Eqpt courses)
6.2. Additional facilities created for improving
the quality of learning experience in labs (25)/
(0)
A. Availability & relevance of additional facilities
(10)
B. Facilities utilization and effectiveness (10)
C. Relevance to POs and PSOs (5)
S Facility Details Reason Utiliza Areas where Relevance
N Name (s) for -tion enhanced to
creating learning POs/PSOs
facility expected
6.3. Labs: Maintenance & overall ambiance
(10)

6.4. Project laboratory (Facilities & Utilization)

(5)
6.5. Safety measures in laboratories (10)
S.N. Name of Laboratory Safety Measures
 Acknowledgement
All the known or unknown sources
used during making the presentation
are duly acknowledged, without the
use of their data/information, the
presentation would not have been so
informative.