Research on Practice of Blended Teaching in 'Electrical Engineering and Electronics' Based on Outcomes-Based Education Principles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to analyze the achievement of course objectives in the "Electrical Engineering and Electronics" curriculum based on Outcomes-Based Education (OBE) principles and to explore strategies for continuous improvement. By clearly defining course objectives and designing corresponding assessment metrics, this study systematically examines student performance in knowledge acquisition, practical skills, and innovative thinking. The results indicate that students demonstrate a high level of proficiency in theoretical knowledge related to direct current (DC) circuit analysis and digital circuit analysis. However, there remains a significant deficiency in their application skills concerning alternating current (AC) circuit analysis and analog circuit design, particularly in areas that are challenging to simulate or experience practically. To address these shortcomings, this paper proposes a series of continuous improvement measures, including optimizing blended teaching methods, increasing practical project opportunities, implementing diversified assessment strategies, and enhancing interaction between instructors and students. Ultimately, this study provides actionable recommendations for curriculum reform based on OBE principles, aiming to contribute to the ongoing development of education in the field of electrical engineering and electronics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".