CO/PO-PSO Mapping

and Attainment
Calculations
 Expected Outcomes

 The participants will be able to map

COs to POs and PSOs.

 The participants will examine the

assessment mechanisms.

 The participants will be able to

calculate the attainment COs and
POs/PSOs.
CO-PO/PSO mapping
 COs for Compiler Construction
CO1: Identify the issue that arise in the
design and construction of
translators for programming
languages.
CO2: Use regular expressions and CFG to
specify the lexical and syntactic
structure of programming language.
CO3: Design scanner and parser from a
given specification.
CO4: Assess the various program
transformations.
 POs
PO1 Application knowledge of mathematics, science,
engineering fundamentals
PO2 Problem Analysis.
PO3 Design and Development of Solutions.
PO4 Conduct investigations by designing experiments,
analysis and interpretation of data and synthesis of
information to provide valid conclusions
PO5 Modern Tool Usage
PO6 Assessing societal, health, safety, legal and cultural
issues
PO7 Examining Environmental impact and Sustainability
PO8 Commitment to professional ethics.
PO9 Function effectively as an individual, and as a member
or leader in diverse teams and in multi disciplinary
settings
PO10 Communicate effectively at oral, written, and
 CO-PO Mapping
CO/ PO PO PO PO PO PO PO PO PO PO1 PO PO
PO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12
CO 3 3 2
1
CO 3 3
2
CO 3 3 3
3
CO 3 3 3
4
Explanation
CO 3 3 3 3
CO1:
5 Identify the issue that arise in the design and
construction
Avg. 3 3 3 3 of3 translators for programming

languages.
This CO contributes to analysis of translation
problem (PO2), examining the source code to
object code mapping (PO1), examining and
evaluating how static analysis of the source
 CO-PO Mapping
CO2: Use regular expressions and CFG to specify the
lexical and syntactic structure of programming
language.
This CO contributes to applying knowledge of formal
notations(PO1), analysis of lexical and syntactic
structure of programming language(problem
analysis PO2), arriving at correct
specification(design/development of solutions PO3)

CO3: Design scanner and parser from a given

specification.
This CO contributes to applying knowledge of formal
notations(PO1), problem analysis to address the
issues in scanning and parsing (PO2), transform the
 CO-PO Mapping
CO4: Assess the various program transformations.
This CO contributes to identifying the need for
applying optimizing transformations(problem
analysisPO2), applying the optimizing
transformations(fundamentals knowledge PO1),
designing optimizer and , evaluating the cost of
transformations(PO4).
CO5: Design a simple compiler for a subset of a
programming language using compiler generators.
This CO contributes to problem analysis(identifying
the subset of the lang. PO2), specifying the lexical
and syntactic structure (applying knowledge PO1).
Designing translation schemes as per
semantics(PO3), and specify all this to flex and bison
 CO-PSO Mapping

CO/PSO PSO1 PSO2 PSO3 PSO4

CO1 3
CO2
CO3
CO4 2
CO5 3 3

PSOs
PSO1: Able to create extensible and reusable code or systems to
strive balance between increasing complexity and reduction in
time available for development
PSO2: Able to use CASE tools that allows speedy and cost effective
implementation of systems
PSO3: Able to assess alternatives for data representations and
algorithms
PSO4: Able to estimate the issues in all area like Databases, System
Software, Security
 CO-PSO Mapping
Explanation
CO1: Identify the issue that arise in the design and
construction of translators for programming languages.
This CO contributes to (PSO4): Able to estimate the
issues in all area like Databases, System Software,
Security.
CO4: Assess the various program transformations.
This CO contributes to (moderately) (PSO3): Able to
assess alternatives for data representations and
algorithms.
CO5: Design a simple compiler for a subset of a
programming language using compiler generators.
This CO contributes to (PSO2): Able to use CASE tools
that allows speedy and cost effective implementation of
systems and (PSO3): Able to assess alternatives for data
 Assessment in OBE
 Assessment process is very important in
OBE, and it should have following
characteristics:
1. It should be valid means it should allow
assessment of what is intended to asses.
2. It should be reliable means should give
consistent results.
3. It should be fair means it should not get
influenced by factors like background of
learner.
 Assessment in OBE
 Direct Assessment: All examinations. It
allows calculation of attainment of COs,
and then using CO-PO/PSO mapping the
attainment of POs and PSOs is
calculated.
 Indirect Assessment : Exit survey,
Employer’s feedback, Alumni feedback.
 Assessment in OBE
Direct Assessment: Mapping questions to
COs
Q.1. Consider the following lexical rules in Lex specification. CO5
 a[abc]c? {return 100;}
ab {return 200;}
c+ {return 300;}
abc {return 400;}
(1) Which rules apply to the strings ab and abc? List
them by their return code.
(2) Which rule/s is/are applied to the strings ab and abc
by the scanner generated by Lex? (Specify the rule/s in
terms of return code). What you conclude about the
way the scanner generated by Lex picks the rule when
multiple rules apply?
(3) What token sequence is produced by the scanner
generated by Lex for string abccc?Why?
 Assessment in OBE
Direct Assessment: Mapping questions to
COs
Explanation: This question attempts to
measure ability to write lex specification
for generating a scanner. Therefore it
contributes to attainment of CO5:
Design a simple compiler for a subset of
a programming language using compiler
generators.
 Assessment in OBE
Direct Assessment: Mapping questions to
COs
Q.2. An elevator is controlled by two commands: a to move CO2,
one floor up and b to move down one floor. Assume that CO3
the building is arbitrarily tall and the elevator starts at
floor x. Write an LL(1) grammar that generates
arbitrary command sequences that (1) never cause the
elevator to go below floor x and (2) always return the
elevator to floor x at the end of the sequence. For
example aabb and abab are valid command sequences,
but abba and abb are not. For convenience you can
consider a null sequence as valid sequence. Prove that
your grammar is LL(1).

Explanation: This question attempts to measure ability

to write CFG suitable for LL(1) parsing for specifying
the language similar to strings of balanced
parenthesis. Therefore it contributes to attainment of
CO2: Use regular expressions and CFG to specify the
 Assessment in OBE
Direct Assessment: Mapping questions to
COs
Q.3. A grammar G has four productions p ,p ,p , and p . The CO3
1 2 3 4
right hand side of p1 consists of two non terminals and
one terminal, right hand side of p2 consists of one
terminal and one non terminal, whereas the right
hand sides of p3 and p4 has a single terminal symbol.
For a string w in L(G), when a top down parser of G is
used, the parser uses production in the order; (p1, p2
p3, p1, p4, p3). If a bottom up parser of G is used to parse
the string w instead of top down parser, in which order
the productions will be used?

Explanation: This question attempts to measure ability

to examine top- down Vs bottom-up parsing.
Therefore it contributes to attainment of CO3: Design
scanner and parser from a given specification.
 Assessment in OBE
Direct Assessment: Mapping questions to
COs
Q.4. Consider a grammar with following productions: D  CO3
TL T  int | float L  id A A  ,L |  . Given below is a
snapshot of configurations of the LL(1) parser for the
above grammar in terms of content of stack and
unexpended input while parsing a string int id,id,id. Fill
in the values for ?1,?2,?3,?4, ?5,?6,?7,?8,?9 and ?10 in
this snapshot.
Content of Stack
Unexpended Input
$D int
id,id,id$
$LT int
id,id,id$
?1 int
id,id,id$
$Aid
id,id,id$
?2 ?3
?4 ?5
$L id,id
$Aid
 Assessment in OBE
Direct Assessment: Mapping questions to
COs
Explanation: This question attempts to examine the
working of LL(1) parser. Therefore it contributes to
attainment of CO3: Design scanner and parser from a
given specification.
CO Attainment calculation(Direct
Assessment)
Sr. No. QUE 1 out of 20 QUE2 out of 20

1 9 15
2 9 12
3 7 9
4 13 0
5 6 9
6   12
7 6 7
8 15 15
9 5 12
10 8 15
11 13 16
12 12 12
13 10 13
14 13 15
60% target 60% target
Attainment Attainment
35.71% 71.42%
 CO Attainment calculation(Direct
Assessment)
Explanation
 
 In an examination there were two question
each of 20 marks, first one contributing to
attainment of CO1, whereas second one
contributing to attainment of CO2, The scores of
the students in each question is given above.

Benchmark decided was 60% score , so %

attainment is calculated by counting the number
of students scoring 60% and above divided by
total number of students.
 CO Attainment calculation(Direct
Assessment)
Attainment levels 
 60% students scoring more than benchmark(60%)-
Level 1
70% students scoring more than benchmark(60%)-
Level 2.
80% students scoring more than benchmark(60%)-
Level 3.
CO1 is not attained, whereas CO2’s attainment
level is 2.
Calculate the attainment level from end semester
examination.
If attainment of CO2 from end semester
examination is level 3, and from internal is level
2(which includes internal tests + assignments etc.),
 CO Attainment calculation(Indirect
Assessment)
Indirect Assessment
Course exit survey: 
 60% students are saying that CO is attained -
Level 1
70% students are saying that CO is attained -
Level 2.
80% students are saying that CO is attained -
Level 3.
CO attainment
Given below is result of attainment of Cos for a
CO1 2
particular course based on course exit survey
CO2 3
CO3 1
CO4 2
CO Attainment calculation(Direct +Indirect
Assessment)
If the weightages are 20% for indirect
assessment and 80% for direct assessment,
then the attainment of COs will be
calculated as follows
CO CO 80%(Direct)
attainm attainme +20% of
ent nt indirect
Direct Indirect
CO1 2.6 2 .8*2.6+.2*
2=2.48
CO2 1.84 1 .
8*1.84+.2*1=1.6
7
CO3 2.2 3 .
8*2.2+.2*3=2.36
 Corrective actions
For example if the attainment of (CO3:
Design scanner and parser from a given
specification) is below the expectation then
some of the corrective actions that needs to
be taken involves:
1. Conducting additional tutorials on
parser design.
2. Giving more assignments of designing LL and
LR parsers from a CFG specification.
 PO Attainment calculation
By factoring in the attainment of COs
 PO attainment =(PO mapping level/3)* CO
attainment
If CO1 attainment level is 2.6 and mapping level of
this CO to aPO1 is 2, then PO1 attainment =
(2/3)*2.6 = 1.73
CO PO1 PO1 PO2 PO2 PO3 PO3
 
atta (Mappin (Attai (Mappi (Attainm (Mappi (Attai
inm g level) nment ng) ent) ng) nmen
ent ) t)
CO 2.6 3 2.6 ____ ____ ____ ____
1
CO 2.2 2 1.47 3 2.2 1 0.74
2
CO 1.8 1 0.6 3 1.8 ____ ____
3
CO 2.0 1 0.66 ___ ____ 3 2.0
4
 PO Attainment calculation
Indirect Assessment
Employer’s feedback and Alumni Feedback: 
 Analyze the feedback collected from employers
and alumni, and find out the levels of attainment
of Pos.
POs Attainment
Levels
PO1 2
PO2 1
PO3 3
PO4 2
PO5 1
 PO Attainment calculation
Direct +Indirect Assessment
If 80% weightage for direct assessment and
20% for indirect assessment then
PO attainment= .8*(Direct attainment)
+.2*(Indirect attainment).
PO Direct Indirect Overall
s Attainment Attainment Attainment
PO 1.33 1 1.27
1
PO 2.0 2 2.0
2
PO 1.37 1 1.3
3
 NBA accreditation evaluation
criteria UG
Engineering
S.N Criteria
Tier-II

1. Vision, Mission and Program Educational Objectives 60

2. Program Curriculum and Teaching – Learning Processes 120

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
8. First Year Academics 50
9. Student Support Systems 50
Governance, Institutional Support and Financial
10. 120
Resources
1000
TOTAL