This document shows the guidelines for the effective mapping of COs with POs. This document will be helpful for the NBA accreditation process.

1. PEO
PO
PSO
Vision
CO CO
CO
Mission
CO
CO
CO
CO
M A P P I N G
COs W I T H
POs/PSOs

2. 2
COURSE ARTICULATION MATRIX
While the COs are defined for a course, it is vital to map the COs with
the POs/PSOs of the program. It facilitates the alignment of course-
level outcomes with program-level outcomes. Mapping of COs with
POs/PSOs creates a visual map of a program. The map may identify
gaps in the current form of COs that are not aligned with any of the
POs/PSOs or there are less COs that support one of more critical
POs/PSOs to the major. It helps eliminate or revise the COs so that all
COs support the POs/PSOs equally well.
In order to map the COs with POs/PSOs, a course articulation matrix is
prepared, where the COs are listed as rows and the POs/PSOs as
columns as shown in Figure below.
Figure 1: Course Articulation Matrix Without Mapping

3. 3
In order to determine whether or not a CO statement has correlation
with a PO/PSO, one need to carefully compare the CO statement with
the PO/PSO statements. If the learning object and the level of the CO
statement are closer to or exactly matches with a PO/PSO statement,
then the CO statement can be correlated with that PO/PSO.
Figure 2: Mapping of COs with POs/PSOs with Correlation
At first, one needs to identify the POs/PSOs that are relevant to a CO
statement. If a CO statement is found to be relevant to any of the
POs/PSOs, a tick (✔) mark is put in the intersecting cell. When we put a
tick mark, we say that the CO statement has some correlation with the
respective PO/PSO. For example, if CO1 is relevant to PO1, a tick mark
is put in the first row (CO1) and first column (PO1). Likewise, as shown
in Figure 7.2, the course articulation matrix is prepared for all COs of a
course with the tick marks in the corresponding POs/PSOs relevant to
them.

4. 4
So far, each CO listed for a course is mapped with POs/PSOs. Now, it’s
time to map each course with POs/PSOs. This is done by taking the
average of each column, as shown in Figure 4 below. The last row of
the course articulation matrix represents the mapping between a
course and the POs/PSOs.
Figure 3: Mapping of COs with POs/PSOs with Correlation Levels
The next step is to determine the strength of the correlation between
the COs and POs/PSOs. The strength of correlation between the COs
and the POs/PSOs, also called correlation level, is given in 3-scale,
where ‘3’ refers to high correlation, ‘2’ refers to moderate correlation,
and ‘1’ refers to slight correlation. If there is no correlation, ‘-’ is put in
the respective cell. Figure 4 shows the course articulation matrix with
the correlation levels.

5. 5
That’s it. The course articulation is ready. But, it is important to see
whether the course is aligned to the intended POs/PSOs. If the course
does not support the intended POs/PSOs, then the CO statements and
the mapping should be revised until the COs conforms to the
requirements.
PROGRAM ARTICULATION MATRIX
The program articulation matrix is another visual map, where the
courses are listed as rows and POs/PSOs as columns. While course
articulation matrix shows the course-POs/PSOs mapping for one
course, program articulation matrix shows the mapping of all courses
with the POs/PSOs for a program. This map is formed by inserting the
course-POs/PSO correlation levels from the course articulation matrix
of individual courses. Figure 5 shows a program articulation matrix.
Figure 4: Mapping of a Course with POs/PSOs

6. 6
After listing the correlation levels of the course-POs/PSOs mapping of
all courses, the average of each column values is determined. This will
give an idea about how far the courses are in alignment with the
POs/PSOs. The last row of the program articulation matrix shows the
correlation levels of the program with the POs/PSOs. Typically, the
average correlation values of a program should be almost equal to all
POs/PSOs. If not, then the COs, the mapping of COs with POs/PSOs,
and/ or the mapping of courses with PO/PSO should be revised.
Figure 5: Program Articulation Matrix

7. 7
PO1: ENGINEERING KNOWLEDGE
Apply the knowledge of mathematics, science, engineering
fundamentals, and an engineering specialization to the solution of
complex engineering problems.
CORRELATION BETWEEN COs AND POs/PSOs
During the mapping of COs with POs/PSOs, we need to first identify
the POs/PSOs a CO statement is correlated to. Then, the correlation
levels are assigned to the related POs/PSOs for the CO statements. In
order to evaluate if a CO statement is correlated with any of the
PO/PSO statements, we compare the CO statement with the PO/PSO
statements. If all or most words of a CO statement can be matched
with the PO/PSO statements, then the CO statement is considered to
be correlated to those PO/PSO statements.
In this section, let’s break each PO/PSO and identify the important
components or keywords that can be incorporated or matched to
identify the correlation.
Figure 6: Components of PO1

8. 8
From the figure, it is understood that PO1 requires the “APPLY” level.
Hence, the CO statement that has correlation with PO1 should use the
taxonomy action verb within “APPLY” level. The learning objects are
mathematics, science, engineering fundamentals, and mechanical
engineering fundamentals. Thus, the CO should contain any one of
these learning objects. The goal of PO1 is to solve the complex
engineering problems, which can be embedded in COs. If the COs are
written with these components, then they are correlated with PO1.
Similarly, other POs/PSOs are expressed as follows:
PO2: PROBLEM ANALYSIS
Identify, formulate, research literature, and analyze engineering
problems to arrive at substantiated conclusions using first principles
of mathematics, natural, and engineering sciences.
Figure 7: Components of PO2

9. 9
PO3: DESIGN/ DEVELOPMENT OF SOLUTIONS
Design solutions for complex engineering problems and design system
components, processes to meet the specifications with consideration
for the public health and safety, and the cultural, societal, and
environmental considerations.
PO4: CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS
Use research-based knowledge including design of experiments,
analysis and interpretation of data, and synthesis of the information
to provide valid conclusions.
Figure 9: Components of PO4
Figure 8: Components of PO3

10. 10
PO5: MODERN TOOL USAGE
Create, select, and apply appropriate techniques, resources, and
modern engineering and IT tools including prediction and modeling to
complex engineering activities with an understanding of the
limitations.
PO6: ENGINEER AND SOCIETY
Apply reasoning informed by the contextual knowledge to assess
societal, health, safety, legal, and cultural issues and the consequent
responsibilities relevant to the professional engineering practice.
Figure 11: Components of PO6
Figure 10: Components of PO5

11. 11
PO7: ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY
Understand the impact of the professional engineering solutions in
societal and environmental contexts, and demonstrate the knowledge
of, and need for sustainable development.
PO8: ETHICS
Apply ethical principles and commit to professional ethics and
responsibilities and norms of the engineering practice.
Figure 12: Components of PO7
Figure 13: Components of PO8

12. 12
PO9: INDIVIDUAL AND TEAMWORK
Function effectively as an individual, and as a member or leader in
teams, and in multidisciplinary settings.
PO10: COMMUNICATION
Communicate effectively with the engineering community and with
society at large. Be able to comprehend and write effective reports
documentation. Make effective presentations, and give and receive
clear instructions.
Figure 14: Components of PO9
Figure 15: Components of PO10

13. 13
PO11: PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND FINANCE
Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of engineering and
management principles and apply these to one’s own work, as a
member and leader in a team. Manage projects in multidisciplinary
environments.
PO12: LIFE-LING LEARNING
Recognize the need for, and have the preparation and ability to
engage in independent and life-long learning in the broadest context
of technological change.
Similarly, we can divide the components of PSOs. The PSOs are
defined by the institute and will vary from institute to institute.
Figure 17: Components of PO12
Figure 16: Components of PO11

14. 14
PO11: PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND FINANCE
Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of engineering and
management principles and apply these to one’s own work, as a
member and leader in a team. Manage projects in multidisciplinary
environments.
PO12: LIFE-LING LEARNING
Recognize the need for, and have the preparation and ability to
engage in independent and life-long learning in the broadest context
of technological change.
The next step is to determine the strength of the correlation between
the COs and POs/PSOs.
Figure 17: Components of PO12
Figure 16: Components of PO11

15. Keyword Learning Object PO
Technical
Complex
engineering
problems
Apply
Mathematics, Science,
Engineering fundamentals,
Mechanical engineering
fundamentals
PO1
Identify,
Formulate,
Review
Literature,
Analyze
Mathematics, Science,
Engineering fundamentals,
Mechanical engineering
fundamentals
PO2
Design,
Develop
Public health, Public
safety, Cultural diversity,
Social needs, Environment
PO3
Use
Research-based knowledge
and methods
PO4
Select, Apply,
Create
Techniques, Resources,
Engineering tools, IT tools
PO5
Other
Aspects
Assess
Health, Safety, Legal,
Cultural aspects, and the
consequent responsibilites
PO6
Understand,
Demonstrate
Impact of the professional
engineering solutions in
societal and environmental
contexts, and sustainable
development goals.
PO7
14
The following tables (Table 1 and Table 2) show the summary of the
components of POs/PSOs. We may map the COs with POs/PSOs by
matching words of COs, and identify what POs/PSOs are correlated to
them.
Table 1: Technical Components (PO1-PO7)

16. Keyword Learning Object PO
Non-
Technical
Affective
Apply, Commit
to
Professional ethics
and responsibilities
and norms of the
engineering practice
PO8
Function as
Individual, or
member/leader in
team.
PO9
Communication
Communicate,
Comprehend,
Make
Report writing, Design
documentation,
Presentations.
PO10
Project
Management
Demonstrate,
Understand,
Apply, Manage
One's own projects or
team's projects using
management
principles.
PO11
Affective
Recognize,
Prepare,
Engage
In independent and
life-long learning.
PO12
16
Table 2: Non-technical Components (PO8-PO12)
While determining the correlation between COs and POs/PSOs, we
check for the taxonomy words and learning objects. According to the
above tables, PO1-PO7 represent the technical knowledge, and PO8-
PO12 represent the non-technical knowledge. If the CO statement
contains the keyword and the learning object matching with the
POs/PSOs, then the respective POs/PSOs have some correlation with
that CO statement.

17. Correlation Level Description
0 No Correlation
1 Slight Correlation
2 Medium Correlation
3 High Correlation
17
CORRELATION LEVELS
After identifying that the POs/PSOs have some correlation with the
COs, the next step is to determine to what degree the correlation
happens between them. According to the NBA guidelines, there are
three correlation levels, as mentioned in the below table.
Table 3: Correlation Levels
To decide the level of correlation between COs and POs/PSOs, we
must build some rubrics or rules. In case of Bloom’s taxonomy, the
levels are assigned depending on the knowledge dimensions of COs.
Table 4 shows the correlation level for PO1-PO7. Most of PO1-PO7 can
be achieved through the cognitive domain, which uses the Revised
Bloom’s taxonomy. Factual knowledge requires only the remembrance
of facts and figures, and hence it is considered as slight correlation.
Conceptual knowledge requires more understanding, rather than mere
memorizing. Hence, the correlation level is moderate. Procedural
knowledge and meta-cognitive knowledge require deep knowledge
and procedures, and hence the correlation level will be high. For
example, PO1 is in the level of “APPLY”. Hence, if a CO statement has
the keyword of “APPLY” level, and the learning dimension is “Factual”,
then the correlation level will be “1”. If the learning dimension is
“Conceptual”, then the correlation level will be “2”. If the learning
dimension is “Procedural” or “Meta-cognitive”, then the correlation
level will be “3”.

18. 18
In case of psychomotor skills, Dave’s taxonomy is used for defining the
COs. PO3, PO4 and PO5 can have psychomotor skills. However, the
correlation levels can be mapped based on the knowledge dimensions.
Affective domain is characterized by the Krathwohl’s taxonomy
keywords. The correlation levels of Krathwohl’s taxonomy are given in
Table 5.
Knowledge Dimension Correlation Level
Factual Knowledge 1
Conceptual Knowledge 2
Procedural Knowledge/
Metacognitive Knowledge
3
Table 4: Correlation Levels for the Bloom‘s & Dave’s Taxonomies
Taxonomy Level Correlation Level
Receiving -
Responding 1
Valuing 2
Organizing,
Internalizing values
3
Table 5: Correlation Levels for the Krathwohl‘s Taxonomy

19. PREPARED BY
DR. J. JEYA JEEVAHAN
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
SATHYABAMA INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
SATHYABAMA DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITY
CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU, INDIA - 600119.