Important: The figures on this page come from the department's own Self Appraisal Report (SAR) submitted to NBA. They are not scores awarded by the NBA evaluation team. The peer team site visit and official assessment are yet to be conducted. This page provides context for the inspection team ahead of their visit.
National Board of Accreditation self-assessment for the Diploma in Electronics & Communication Engineering, Government Polytechnic Palanpur — assessed against nine criteria worth 1000 marks.
Full SAR submitted to NBA for Tier-2 diploma accreditation.
Attainment of each Programme Outcome and Programme Specific Outcome for the current assessment year, 2025-26, with the two preceding years for comparison. Every outcome exceeded its target in all three years.
| Outcome | 2023-24 | 2024-25 | 2025-26 (current) | Margin | Status | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Target | Attained | Target | Attained | Target | Attained | |||
| PO 1Basic & Discipline Specific Knowledge | 1.78 | 1.93 | 1.87 | 2.04 | 1.95 | 2.22 | +0.27 | ✓ Exceeded |
| PO 2Problem Analysis | 1.26 | 1.44 | 1.32 | 1.60 | 1.38 | 1.71 | +0.33 | ✓ Exceeded |
| PO 3Design / Development of Solutions | 1.28 | 1.61 | 1.34 | 1.62 | 1.40 | 1.75 | +0.35 | ✓ Exceeded |
| PO 4Engineering Tools, Experimentation & Testing | 1.37 | 1.67 | 1.44 | 1.62 | 1.50 | 1.84 | +0.34 | ✓ Exceeded |
| PO 5Engineering Practices for Society, Sustainability & Environment | 1.15 | 1.44 | 1.21 | 1.38 | 1.26 | 1.52 | +0.26 | ✓ Exceeded |
| PO 6Project Management | 1.17 | 1.53 | 1.23 | 1.56 | 1.28 | 1.70 | +0.42 | ✓ Exceeded |
| PO 7Life-long Learning | 1.34 | 1.62 | 1.41 | 1.68 | 1.47 | 1.88 | +0.41 | ✓ Exceeded |
| PSO 1Installation & Problem Solving of EC Equipment | 1.63 | 1.83 | 1.71 | 1.90 | 1.78 | 2.15 | +0.37 | ✓ Exceeded |
| PSO 2Specialised Software, Coding & PCB Design | 1.38 | 1.72 | 1.45 | 1.71 | 1.51 | 1.98 | +0.47 | ✓ Exceeded |
The target is not a single fixed number applied to every outcome. It is set for each outcome individually, and it moves.
Each outcome's target is a percentage of that same outcome's average in the Programme Articulation Matrix. Because those averages differ — 2.67 for PO 1, 1.73 for PO 5 — the targets differ too, and each outcome is measured against what the curriculum can actually deliver for it.
The percentage started at 66.67% — the level-2 equivalent on the 1–3 mapping scale — and is revised by ±3 percentage points each year: up if the target was achieved, down if it was not. It has moved only upward: 66.67% → 70% → 73%.
Every outcome cleared its target in all three years, and the margins widened rather than narrowed while the bar was being raised twice. That is what allowed the department to keep tightening the standard instead of relaxing it.
| Outcome | PO1 | PO2 | PO3 | PO4 | PO5 | PO6 | PO7 | PSO1 | PSO2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matrix average | 2.67 | 1.89 | 1.92 | 2.05 | 1.73 | 1.75 | 2.01 | 2.44 | 2.07 |
| Target (73% of it) | 1.95 | 1.38 | 1.40 | 1.50 | 1.26 | 1.28 | 1.47 | 1.78 | 1.51 |
| Attained 2025-26 | 2.22 | 1.71 | 1.75 | 1.84 | 1.52 | 1.70 | 1.88 | 2.15 | 1.98 |
The figure 2.00 appears elsewhere in the SAR, in Criterion 2, as the threshold below which an outcome's Programme Articulation Matrix average counts as a curricular gap — a property of the GTU curriculum, on the mapping scale. It is not the attainment target, and the two are not comparable. Attainment targets are the per-outcome values in the table above. Measured against those, every PO and PSO has exceeded its target in every year of the assessment period.
Marks below are the official NBA maxima for each criterion under Tier-2 diploma norms — 1000 marks in total. They are not scores. The SAR documents the department's evidence against each criterion; the marks actually awarded are determined by the NBA peer team after the site visit.
Criterion 5 (Faculty Information and Contributions) is the only chapter of the SAR that scores itself, arriving at 146.33 of 150. No self-assessed score is stated in the SAR for any other criterion, so none is published here.
Academics are audited at four levels — CTE, the GTU Local Inspection Committee, an inter-departmental committee, and continuous HOD monitoring during every semester. Audits are recorded in every year of the assessment period.
AICTE-format feedback collected from all students every semester and scored on five parameters. Faculty receiving average feedback are reviewed by the HOD and deputed to Faculty Development Programmes.
FDP participation is scored per faculty member and per year. The department reached the assessment ceiling in all three years measured, with 19 of 22 participating faculty at maximum points in 2024-25.
New facilities were created in every assessment year, backed by a full purchase trail — GeM contract numbers, order dates and amounts — including a VLSI trainer with Xilinx Spartan-6 FPGA and an AVR embedded trainer.
Course Outcome attainment is computed for all 40 courses of the programme, combining 80% direct assessment with 20% Course Exit Survey, then rolled up into PO and PSO attainment.
Twenty-two beyond-syllabus activities since 2019-20 — IoT, VLSI, AI-ML, drone technologies, HAM radio, cyber security, semiconductor manufacturing — targeted at the four Program Outcomes flagged as curricular gaps.
Years of accreditation are from Part A of the SAR, which records a first and second accreditation for three programmes and no prior accreditation for Electronics & Communication. The SAR does not state the expiry of the current cycle; the institute's NBA accreditation page records it as valid to 30 June 2027.
| Programme | 1st accreditation | 2nd accreditation | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mechanical Engineering | 2021 | 2024 | Accredited 2021, re-accredited 2024 |
| Civil Engineering | 2021 | 2024 | Accredited 2021, re-accredited 2024 |
| Electrical Engineering | 2021 | 2024 | Accredited 2021, re-accredited 2024 |
| Electronics & Communication | — | — | Applying first time |
The Information & Communication Technology and Information Technology programmes do not appear in the SAR's accreditation history table and are not yet eligible.
The National Board of Accreditation of India evaluates technical programmes against defined quality standards. Diploma-level accreditation (Tier 2) assesses nine criteria covering curriculum, teaching-learning, student performance, faculty quality, facilities and governance. The Self Appraisal Report is the department's own documented self-assessment, submitted before the NBA peer team's site visit. The final accreditation decision and official scores are determined by the evaluation team after the visit.
