A Review Paper on Excellence in Engineering Education: Improving in Local Perspective

IJSRD - International Journal for Scientific Research & Development| Vol. 4, Issue 04, 2016 | ISSN (online): 2321-0613

A Review Paper on Excellence in Engineering Education: Improving in Local Perspective Vikas Ucharia1 Dr. Priyavrat Thareja2 Prateek Guleria3 Chetan Sharma4 Rupinder Singh Kanwar5 1,3,4,5 School of Mechanical Engineering, Bahra University, Waknaghat, Solan 2 Dean Engineering, GNA University, Phagwara Abstract— Effective learning encourages us to look at the work around us, add value for our customers and remove extra steps that waste our time and resources. We need a method of streamlining processes, resulting in increased revenue, reduced costs and improved customer satisfaction and comply with customer perception. A lean process is faster, efficient, as achieved by removing waste and economical as activities not required to complete a process are suspended. They thus deliver satisfactory quality. To cut flab or defects Lean and Six Sigma are two prescribed tools. After removing waste, only the steps required to produce a product or service that is satisfactory to a customer will remain. There is thus a case in making above attributes waste free and contribute to excellence in Education. Key words: Education I. INTRODUCTION In the ancient Indian education system Swami Vivekananda, a proponent of intellectual upbringing of students, through explosive enrichment of mind’s concentration and powers that knocks out the knowledge from within. He thought the manifestation of knowledge was much more essential than the cramming of facts, which were futile both in content and essence of learning which is requiring a more holean analysis; attempting to underline the holistic, holy, and Lean (holean) aspects of academics. This is vital for augmenting processes of today’s education for excellence. The global purpose is in transforming the students to achieve an awakening, for which the process of education provides necessary arising. Achievable through a progression of quality AUM Model [46] (Alignment, Utilization, and Metamorphosis), a higher level transformation may be sought. For this maintaining an effective learning environment is vital [47]. Apart, Six Sigma [38] is a method of efficiently solving a problem, its data driven approach based on measurement of the process variation using statistical process control can be augmented for Leaning operations. Six Sigma helps reduce process variation and amount of defective products manufactured or services provided, so products or services can be reliably delivered as expected, rendering greater customer satisfaction. It is a strategy to improve process quality by identifying and eliminating defects and minimizing variation in process outputs. A combination of Lean with six sigma accelerates delivery of greater results than what would typically be achieved by lean or six sigma individually. Combining these two methods gives improvement team a comprehensive tool set to increase the speed and effectiveness of any process through streamlining the process and enabling the organization to do more with less - using fewer resources. Streamlined process results in products or services that are completed faster and more efficiently at no cost to quality.

Lean six sigma decreases the organization cost and enables to fix processes improving the efficiency of the organization, and (ii) developing and involving effective employees in the improvement process, thus maximizes organization efforts towards delivering quality service [54]. Promotion of active participation, positively affects people by engaging them in improving the way they work. It thus helps reduce the amount of defective products manufactured or services provided, and render greater customer satisfaction. It is a strategy to improve process quality by identifying and eliminating defects and minimizing variation in process outputs. The tool Quality Function Deployment (QFD) helps strategically addresses any ‘Process in-pain [15]. Thus for analyzing the customer’s voice, and finding a robust solution one deploys QFD which implies Quality => as Function => its Deployment. It helps when we need to achieve excellence, to delight the customers. Called “House of Quality”, it supports other tools viz. Affinity Diagram, Relation Diagram, Tree Diagram, Matrix Diagram, Matrix Data Analysis, Arrow Diagram and Process Decision Program Chart (PDPC) etc. Since students are the closest to the actual work (production of a product or delivery of a service, as termed in education) of any organization, they contribute as dominant resources (controlled by student: teacher ratio) to understand how to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of business process. Also they can continue to find and remove problems and waste in the organization. A. Limiters in Engineering Education and Need to Abate Wastes: Presently, Engineering education, though it plays a dynamic and vital role in social welfare and economic well being of the nation is shunned; as most of the engineering institutions in India are performing without maintaining and sustaining the quality. Reputation comes with the service quality and quality has now become the decisive factor in attracting the students and faculties to the institution. Though in last few years (www.aicte-india.org) number of institutions offering technical education mushroomed by 16% yet only 17.5% of engineering graduates were deemed employable in a 2011 survey by software industry lobby group Nasscom. At least 70% of engineering colleges in India are providing poorquality education and this has led to reduced interest in the subject (Raju Davis Parepadan, chairman of Kerala-based Holygrace Academy). Thus both the quality of education and employability has suffered. The employability of engineering graduates in various states ranges between 12% and 42%, according to a report by education assessment company Aspiring Minds. Only 18.43% of engineers are reported employable in software engineer-IT services roles and for jobs in mechanical, electronics/electrical and civil engineering, a mere 7.49% are employable (Hindustan Times 22.09.2015).

1218

A Review Paper on Excellence in Engineering Education: Improving in Local Perspective (IJSRD/Vol. 4/Issue 04/2016/296)

Such unsatisfactory performance is measureable at the students selected in campus interviews (SSCI), or amongst students as entrepreneurs (SE), Students opted higher education (SHE) and various organizations visiting campuses for recruiting students (OVCR). Theoretically, Managing and maintaining quality of education is not same as that in case of manufacturing industries or service industries, but the principles applied in industries are applicable to education sector. Essentially development of theory initiates from education sectors. However, how Quality counts in service assert the performance measurement system documented in education sector does not reflect the actual potential. Increasingly, engineering institutes have opted for ISO certification to ensure the quality of their product and in order to improve the results and revenue. Now a day’s high student failure in examination and fewer number of placement opportunities are creating havoc in institutions which in manufacturing units are considered as defects. This is the time to study the various types of failure that are occurring in the system and to study if defects can or cannot be removed or minimized. The factors that are Critical to Quality (CTQ) are being considered and are divided into three types of customers. The students are generally varied on various aspects but in this work three most occurring scenario is assumed for study: 1) Students Selected from campus interview (SSCI) 2) Students selected for higher education (SHE) 3) Students as an entrepreneur So keeping the customer expectation [34] in mind, this research work is focused to not only address customer requirement but also seek to align with excellence. Apart from students, there are mainly five customers of technical education: 1. Students Primary 2. Alumni Secondary 3. Parents Secondary 4. Industries Tertiary 5. Government Tertiary 6. Society Obligatory All these six are assumed as the beneficiaries of technical education in one way or the other, so worthy is their voice as of customer. ServQual [35] is and EduQual [28] are the media which chased perception of the quality by the customers or the students as the case is. II. LITERATURE REVIEW The service quality, cultural changes in engineering, market orientation and application of six sigma and TQM in engineering institutes have generally formed the knowledge inventory around solicited domain of present research. Over the past few years following research has been presented: A. Student Performance and Quality of Education Hindering Excellence: Hargrove S.K. et al (2002) explained that the retention rate for science and engineering students was roughly one third and proposed adapting industry approaches including six sigma methods to assess, evaluate and monitor variation in student’s performance for improvement. They proposed the

methodology to increase the retention rate of said science and engineering students. Ardi et al. (2011) study showed that all quality dimensions in the HE (Higher Education), i.e. faculty’s commitment, department’s commitment, course delivery, campus facilities, courtesy, customer feedback and improvement, were valid in constructing a TQM Model in HE. Useful suggestions for future research included carrying out a comparative study in other engineering faculties in other institutions, both state and private, to test the conceptual model. Limitation of the study was that it only used perceptual data of final year students. It also had been interesting to know how the perception of another grade of students. Dew J. (2009) stated that quality with respect to higher education had several challenges such as endurance, conformance to requirement, continuous improvement and value addition. The process variability not only existed within the students but professors as well i.e. grading by professor might be different and instructional methods might have variations too. Yulia S. (2012) discussed the importance of using regular educational environment evaluation, which involved students’ indirect participation in decision making, as one of the most essential quality assurance activities associated with higher school improvement. It also emphasized the significance of measuring student satisfaction in education, student satisfaction and student motivation being the result of student interactions with the educational environment in the form of student’s perceptions of the educational services. Thareja Priyavrat (2012) prescribed AUM model for guidance and practicing to elucidate the hierarchical progression of learner for excellent performance. He also emphasized on the need of inculcating excellence. The conformance to good education practice could have not been ignored. Author also mentioned that many new institutions have been circumscribed on motive of making money. B. Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction: Parasuraman et al. (1985) come up with a ten determinants such as tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, communications, access, competence, courtesy, credibility, security and knowledge provided to customer, titled as “SERVQUAL”. They defined the tangibility as a function of physical activities and equipment, reliability as ability to perform, communication as how well consumer and producer are interacting, competency as an urge to provide service. Mahapatra S.S. et al (2007) developed a survey based model - EduQUAL to especially suit a technical education system. Four neural network models such as P-E gap, P- only, E-P gap and E & P models were developed for predicting the service quality for stakeholders and observed P-E gap model was the best model. The study demonstrated the methodology for modelling customer evaluation of service quality in the education sector. The study provided a framework for the identification of system design requirements for successful implementation of quality programmes with reference to the identified common service quality items using QFD. The result indicated that the attributes of opportunities of knowledge upgradation should have been implemented first; before the attributes of continuous evaluation are attempted by the administrators of

1219

A Review Paper on Excellence in Engineering Education: Improving in Local Perspective (IJSRD/Vol. 4/Issue 04/2016/296)

Technical Education Sector. Also management responsibility played an important role in the system design for the overall implementation of quality improvement programme. C. Quality of Education and Six Sigma: Yerneni et al (2013) stated that a number of qualifications ranging from diploma and foundation Degree to Honours degree, Post-graduation programmes such as masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s degree and doctorates are considered as higher education and had presented the tools to achieve excellence in the field of higher education in India and found that there was a good amount of research work done on quality of higher education sector but the work was done with respect to particular parameters and to particular areas like engineering etc. thus there was a need to view the higher education system as a whole and study the scope of enhancing the higher education system in India. Thus there was a need to conduct research in higher education area. Kaushik P. et al (2008) explored the fundamentals of Six Sigma and its connection with industry and academia in efforts to provide a greater understanding of the subject. They applied DMAIC methodology to answer what, why and how of Six Sigma players could play an important role in improving the quality of education system. Patil V.H. et al (2006) explored the fundamentals of six sigma and its use in education for process excellence to improve the overall performance of the students. The clients were the students and the quality of learning they achieved was the service. Jenicke L.O. et al (2008) has examined the challenges of implementing the six sigma methodology in academia and proposed a framework that served as a guide for implementing six sigma in academic institutes. A three tiered framework to organize the six sigma improvement methodology and related academic performance indicators into a hierarchy fitting academic institution governance levels was proposed. The framework could have been used by administrators, faculty, staff and students. Kaushik P et al (2010) have studied a relationship between application of six sigma in corporations and in higher education. Six sigma provided a philosophy to meet the decreased needs of industry with improved customer satisfaction and similarly in academics, six sigma strategy could have been applied to improve productivity. In industry a company might be looked at defects in its final manufactured products, whereas in education defect related to failing pass percentage among students. The study specific to technical education institutes. Ho S.L. et al (2006) have made an attempt to study the feasibility of applying Six sigma framework in higher education. They applied DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyse, Improvement, Control) methodology and statistical quality engineering education to design curriculum to achieve educational excellence. They also demonstrated that six sigma framework provided an excellent platform for infusing statistical education into the engineering curriculum. Kanakana M.G. et al (2012) illustrated how lean six sigma could effectively be applied to engineering education. The study indicated that students spent less time on their subjects during normal lecturing weeks than the time they did on their work during test weeks, therefore there was a need to increase student engagement as they felt unprepared for the

tests. The test indicated that the chances of passing the subjects increased it students spent more time during normal lecturing weeks. Group work and E-learning had also been proposed as a control measure to sustain the improvements. Implementation of the proposed solution had increased the throughput of one of the subjects from 38% in 2009 to 71% in 2010. Yu Kun-Tzu et al (2012) have emphasized the use of Six Sigma (DMAIC) procedures and Importance Performance Analysis (IPA) method to implement a feedback system. The study proposed some useful instruments to illustrate how evaluations of teaching could be made simple and objective by using questionnaires, how to detect the disadvantages on teaching and the decision strategy to prioritize disadvantages that were in need of corrective action. Overall they used the improvement process through effective feedback system. Mazumdar Q.H. (2014) has analysed that the higher education process showed three sigma level qualities that required significant improvement to achieve six sigma level. He found that the success of the students was measured through higher quality education, where failure of any student might be considered as a defect in the process. Due to variability in the process like different type of instruction by different professors, a variation of quality existed. Variations of quality might be due to lack of learning ability of the students and adopting to different learning styles of the students. Control charts were also used to improve the higher education process, student satisfaction, success rate and retention rate which would have been resulted quality and sustainable process. D. Organization Culture: Green K.W. et al (2007) investigated the relationship between market orientation and service quality across the industries and incorporated those construct into the domain of organizational culture focussed on customer care. They concluded that adoption of a market orientation dimensions measured, customer focus was the more powerful in terms of explaining variation in the service quality dimensions of tangibles, reliability, assurance, responsiveness and empathy. Thareja P.et al (2010) concluded that material civilization has exploited resources made auto repairing of environment society system more difficult. For rejuvenation to a better state he emphasized three stages begin from Alignment for SHEQ (safety, Health, Environment, Quality), Utilization for new efficiencies or products and metamorphosis for new awakening at cultural level. Mostly teachers worked at utilization and failed to stand to SHEQ and social system requirements. For developing a holistic competence of material engineer, the education or training for shop floor persons should have been targeted at full comprehension. Campatelli G. et al (2011) had explained that the complexity of the Public Administrationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s process was due to the lack of experience in the field of process improvement and the reduced human resources usually dedicated to the given task were responsible for the difficulty in monitoring analysing and improving their process. They developed a simplified mode based on EFQM (European Foundation for Quality Management) auto-evaluation model and six sigma approach especially designed for PA processes, dependant on

1220

A Review Paper on Excellence in Engineering Education: Improving in Local Perspective (IJSRD/Vol. 4/Issue 04/2016/296)

the self analysis and self diagnosis in the form of questionnaires, workshop or brainstorming approach. Elassy (2013) suggested that studies had been needed to address the applicability of that model in HEIâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (Higher Engineering Institution) because it helped to identify the available opportunities that HEIâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s provided to their students in order to participate in QAP (Quality Assurance Process) . Such a model might be able to clarify and organize the chances that an institution offered to its stakeholders and to students in particular which helped to highlight the student involvement opportunities in RA (Reflective Analysis). Ucharia et al (2015) have made an attempt to study the causes of academic time losses, using situation analysis through deployment of problem solving tools. To find out the root cause of the situation created by the students in terms of mass bunk, a cause and effect analysis was done and then prioritize to remove errs. The prioritization was carried out using multivoting techniques and Pareto analysis. The study not only helped in saving the career of the students but also created an emotional and sustainable learning environment. Oko A. et al (2015) investigated into the admission process and used the qualitative method of data analysis, the DMAIC model for process improvement to solve the inherent problems. The investigation was done through the use of the questionnaire and found that lot of energy was wasted through transportation, information delivery method and long distance travelled by applicants. With the implementation of Lean Six Sigma principles the cycle time, process lead time, rework and repetition of functions were reduced and most of the admissions were done online. Bargerstock A.S. et al (2015) have applied CTL (Close-the-loop) report with newly trained kaizen team, Deming five stage DMAIC methodologies to streamline and improve the efficiencies for an academic assessment. CTL report was introduced for effective delivery of course outcomes and planning instructional improvements for all other courses. The CTL process reduced cycle time by two third, removed frustrating non-value added activities, discovered additional customer value and boosted the compliance rate. The purpose of CTL report was course improvement which ultimately was for the benefit and satisfaction of future students. Several form of wastes were identified in the improvement process e.g. multiple forms of duplication, time consuming copying and pasting from one document to another, summarizing data from different sources, waiting for the student evaluation at end of the course through survey data and a low compliance rate. E. Lean Six Sigma In Education: Antony J. et al (2012) evaluated critically whether LSS could be a powerful business improvement methodology for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of higher education institutes. They also explored the fundamental challenges, barriers and critical success factors for the introduction and development of LSS in the higher education. They made an attempt to remove the myth that LSS is confined to manufacturing. Albliwi S. et al (2013) have found a gap in lean Six Sigma used as a coherent strategy for business improvement. They aimed to explore the most common themes within LSS in the manufacturing sector and to identify the gap in those

themes which might have been preventing users from getting the most benefit from their LSS strategy. Vats et al (2015) have given the idea to implement lean six sigma to identify the degradation of the student performance. That time lean six sigma was yet to be implemented in education sector. In their work an effective lean six sigma model was presented for an institution running the higher educational programmes. The throughput was defined in terms of student performance. The lean six sigma model has been applied on various aspects for various stakeholders associated with institutes and identified problem constraints and deficiencies in the system. The work has been identified the vectors that were involved in the degradation of the student performance so that the significant improvement to the performance could be obtained. Svensson C et al (2015) reviewed the initial phase on implementation and highlighted future challenges of applying LSS method in Higher Education System. They resulted in improvements in business process and efficiency, through project execution and training programme. Approximately 350 staff members had completed awareness training, 50 yellow belts and 150 green belts have been trained to improve the process. Antony Jiju (2015) presented the fundamental challenges in the deployment of LSS within the higher education context. The data in the form opinion or viewpoints was collected from leading academics and practitioners. Author classified the challenges of LSS implementation into three categories; organizational, technical and individual challenges. Lack of visionary leadership for LSS journey from top management team in the HEs sector made the deployment a total failure. The difficulty of defining and measuring quality in a HE was technical challenge. Lack of staff engagement, full academic freedom and autonomy was the individual challenge. III. CONCLUSION Applying quality engineering methodology over the engineering education system, many researchers sought a guide map that should demonstrate excellence, by improving various direct and dependent processes to an extent where these satisfy the various customers in their relative priority. Students are directly involved in the services provided to them by the institutes, so ten determinants were recognized by Parasuraman (1985) which were provided to customer. Mahapatra, (2007) adapted customer evaluation of service quality to propose EduQUAL methodology various stakeholders customer satisfaction. Mahapatra assumed student as a primary customer who is availing the direct services of engineering institutes. The understanding of latter is not much clear. As intake of engineering students has withdrawn by All India Counsel for Technical Education (Hindustan Times, 22.09.2015) to maintain or decrease the retention rate, six sigma methodology (Hargrove, 2002) was applied to monitor the variation in students performance in curriculum. To achieve educational excellence DMAIC was applied to design curriculum (Ho S.L., 2006). Pass percentage of the students were also improved by applying six sigma (Kaushik P, 2010), which though varies with the learning ability of the student (Mazumdar Q.H., 2014).

1221

A Review Paper on Excellence in Engineering Education: Improving in Local Perspective (IJSRD/Vol. 4/Issue 04/2016/296)

Lean Six Sigma (LSS) which was earlier confined to manufacturing can be applied in education sector (Antony, 2012) to improve the efficiency. Though there are lot of challenges (Svensson C., 2015) and barriers in implementing the LSS in education system which were due to the lack of visionary leadership (Antony Jiju, 2015) from top management but even then LSS helps in the improvement of the student performance (Vats, 2015) by identifying their degradation. Students involvement and participation cannot be ignored for their better performance (Kanakana, 2012). Thareja (2012) exhorted working conscientiously to guide or mentor learners over a three step paradigm AUM for achieving excellence. Patil V.H. (2006) assumed students as client to improve their overall performance. Ardi (2011) used customer feedback to know the perception of the students. Yu Kun-Tzu (2012) detected the disadvantages on teaching through feedback from the students. They emphasised on the student satisfaction. To improve the quality of education the standard taken is the satisfaction of the students and the services provided to them, so to provide better and better quality education to the students, stress was given to provide the facilities students want, so that more and more students can be influenced to be a part of that institute for resilience. An empathetic treatment was given to the students for better performance (Green K.W., 2007). The admission process was made convenient and students or customer expectations and perception were taken care of. Quality improvement was emphasized not only in students but also in teachers and their skills to achieve excellence. The faculty commitment, department commitment, teaching pedagogy, facilities in the campus, students feedback, research work, students participation in improving quality learning process and teaching process but at low cost was also recommended. The culture of the institute also play an important role in achieving educational excellence, for this training to the teachers and shop floor persons is recommended (Thareja, 2010). Improvement, which may decline due to the lack of experience, can be achieved through self diagnosis and brain storming (Camatelli, 2011). Students can be motivated and satisfied by indirect participation in decision making (Yulia S., 2012) which helped them to participate in Quality Assurance Process (Elassy, 2013). It calls for up-valuing the role of a student as an operator of education and research. The researcher studied that an emotional and sustainable learning environment must be maintained for the betterment of the students and their career (Ucharia, 2015). Models like EduQual therefore need be reworked at using the paradigm of a greater student intervention in learning or education. The rework and repetition of function (Oko, 2015) and non value added activities (Bargerstock, 2015) which waste the energy was eliminated to make the students in comfort zone and to improve the process. REFERENCES [1] Antony J., Krishan N, Cullen D., Kumar M., “Lean Six Sigma for higher education institutes (HEIs): Challenges, barriers, success factors, tools/techniques” International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 61, Issue 8, 2012 [2] Antony Jiju, “Challenges in the deployment of LSS in the higher education sector: View points from leading

academics and practitioners”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 64, Issue 6, pp 893-899, 2015 [3] Ardi, R., Hidayatno A, Zagloel, T.Y.M., “Investigating relationships among quality dimensions in higher education” Quality Assurance in Education Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 408-428, 2012 [4] Ali, H.M., Musah, M.B. (2012) “Investigation of Malaysian higher education quality culture and workforce performance” Quality Assurance in Education Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 289-309. [5] Bargerstock A.S., Richards S.R. (2015) “Case Study: Application of DMAIC to Academic Assessment in Higher Education” Quality Approaches in Higher Education, Vol. 6, No. 2. [6] Berry, Parasuraman and Zeithaml, "Quality Counts in Services, Too," Business Horizons, May-June 1985, pp. 44-52. [7] Berry, Zeithaml and Parasuraman, "Five Imperatives for Improving Service Quality," Sloan Management Review, summer 1990, pp. 29-38. [8] Berry and Parasuraman, Marketing Services: Competing Through Quality (New York: The Free Press), 1991. [9] Berry and Parasuraman, "Prescriptions for a Service Quality Revolution in America," Organizational Dynamics, spring 1992, pp. 5-15. [10] Berry, Parasuraman and Zeithaml, "Ten Lessons for Improving Service Quality," Marketing Science Institute, May 1993, Report No. 93-104. [11] Berry, Parasuraman and Zeithaml, "Improving Service Quality in America: Lessons Learned," Academy of Management Executive, May 1994, pp. 32-52. [12] Berry and Parasuraman, "Listening to the Customer: The Concept of a Service-Quality Information System," Sloan Management Review, Spring 1997, pp. 65-76. [13] Brusoni M, (2014) “The concept of excellence in higher education-ENQA, www.enqa.au/index.php/publications/ [14] Campatelli G., Citti P., Meneghin A. (2011) “Development of a simplified approach based on the EFQM model and six sigma for the implementation of TQM principles in a university administration” Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, Vol. 22, Issue 7. [15] Chahal Amrinder Singh Thareja P. (2012) “Simulation Assisted Production: A New Perspective for Developing Competitive and Green Castings” International Journal of Production and Quality Engineering. Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 23-30, [16] Debnath, R.M., Shankar, R. (2012) “Improving service quality in technical education: use of interpretive structural modeling” Quality Assurance in Education Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 387-407. [17] Dew J. (2009) “Quality issues in higher education” The Journal for Quality and Participation, 32(1), 4-9. [18] Dr. Quamrul H. Mazumdar (2014) “Applying Six Sigma in Higher Education Quality Improvement” 121st ASEE Annual conference and Exposition. Paper ID# 8594. [19] Elassy, N. (2013) “A model of student involvement in quality assurance system at institutional level” Quality Assurance in Education Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 162-198.

1222

A Review Paper on Excellence in Engineering Education: Improving in Local Perspective (IJSRD/Vol. 4/Issue 04/2016/296)

[20] Green K.W. , Chalrabarty S., Whitten D. (2007) “Organizational culture of customer care: market orientation and service quality” International Journal of service and Standards, Vol. 3, No. 2, 137-153 [21] Hargrove S.K., Burge L. (2002) “Developing a six sigma methodology for improving retention in engineering education” Frontier in Education, Vol. 3, Page S3c-20S3C-24. [22] Ho S.L., Xie M., Goh T.N. (2006) “Adopting Six Sigma in higher education: some issue and challenges” International Journal of Six Sigma and Competitive Advantage, Vol. 2, Issue 4. [23] Jenicke L.O., Anil Kumar, Holmes M.C. (2008) “A framework for applying six sigma improvement methodology in an academic environment” The TQM Journal, Vol. 20, Issue 5, PP 453-462. [24] Kanakana M.G., Pretorius J.H.C., Van wyk B.J., (2012) “Applying Lean Six Sigma in Engineering Education at Tshwane University of Technology” International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operation Management” Page(s) 211-220 [25] Kaushik P., Khanduja D., Sharma M. (2008) “ Six Sigma Professionals: From industry to institute” The Indian Journal of Technical Education, Vol. 31, No. 2 [26] Kaushik P., Khanduja D. (2010) “Utilizing Six Sigma for improving pass percentage of students: A technical institute case study” educational Research and Review. Vol 5(9), pp 471-483. [27] Mahapatra S.S., Khan M.S. (2007) “A framework for analyzing quality in education settings” European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 32, No. 2, 205217 [28] Mahapatra S.S., Khan M.S. (2007) “A neural network approach for assessing quality in technical education: an empirical study” International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, Vol. 2, No. 3, P 287-306 [29] Oko A, Kang P.S. (2015) “Lean Six Sigma Approach to Improve the Admissions Process for a Nigerian HE Institute” International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, Vol. 6, Issue 5. [30] Parasuraman, Valarie, Zeithaml, Berry, (1985) “A conceptual Model of Service Quality and Future Research”, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49, No. 4, pp. 41-50 [31] Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry, "SERVQUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale for Measuring Customer Perceptions of Service Quality," Journal of Retailing, spring 1988, pp. 12-40. [32] Parasuraman, Berry and Zeithaml, "Guidelines for Conducting Service Quality Research," Marketing Research, December 1990, pp 34-44. [33] Parasuraman, Berry and Zeithaml, "Understanding Customer Expectations of Service," Sloan Management Review, spring 1991, pp. 39-48. [34] Parasuraman, Berry and Zeithaml, "Perceived Service Quality as a Customer-Based Performance Measure: An Empirical Examination of Organizational Barriers Using an Extended Service Quality Model," Human Resource Management, Fall 1991, pp. 335-64. [35] Parasuraman, Berry and Zeithaml, "Refinement and Reassessment of the SERVQUAL Scale," Journal of Retailing, winter 1991, pp. 420-50.

[36] Patil V.H., Kamlapur S.M., Dhire M.L. (2006) “Six Sigma in Education: To Achieve Overall Excellence in the Field of Education” International Conference in Information Technology, Page 2-5. [37] Prasad, K.G., Subbaiah, K., Padmavathi, G. (2012) “Application of Six Sigma Methodology in an Engineering Educational Institution” International Journal of Emerging Sciences (IJES), pp. 222-237. [38] Pourrajab, M., Basri, R., Daud, S. Asmirian, S. (2011) “Applying Total Quality management in the classroom and solving students failure” KASBIT Business Journal 4, pp. 69-76. [39] Richard Sagor (2000) “Guiding School Improvement with Action Research” Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Ch 3, www.ascd.org [40] Romualdas Kasuba, Pranas Ziliukas, (2004) “A comparative review of two major international accrediting consortia for engineering education: the Washington Accord and the Bologna Process” World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, Vol. 3, No.1 [41] Subbarao, E.C. (2013) “India’s higher engineering education, opportunities and tough choices” Current Science, Vol. 104 No. 1, pp. 55-65. [42] Sandmaung, M., Khang, D.B. (2013) “Quality expectations in Thai higher education institutions; multiple stakeholder perspectives” Quality Assurance in Education Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 260-281. [43] Svenssson C., Antony J., Ba-Essa M., Baksh M., Albliwi S. (2015) “A Lean Six Sigma program in higher education” International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management” Vol. 32, Issue 9, pp 951-969. [44] Stukalina Yulia (2012)”Addressing service quality issues in higher education: the educational environment evaluation from the students’ perspective” Technological and Economic Development of Economy. Vol. 18, Issue 1. [45] [Thareja P., Mahapatra P.B., Sharma D.D. (2010) “Metamorphosis in Teaching of Material: A case study aligning Manufacturing Requirements” National Conference on Advances in Materials and Manufacturing Technology. [46] Thareja Priyavrat (2012) “Institutionalize Quality to Excellence in Technical University” Journal of Production research and Management Vol.2, Issue 2, pages 14-19 [47] Thareja, Priyavrat and Thareja, Mannu (2013) “Gurukula: The Preface of a Cool Education Environment”. OmniScience: A Multi-disciplinary Journal, Vol. 3, No. 3, p 1-10. [48] Ucharia V., Thareja P. (2015) “ Repairing Dissatisfaction based Instructional Loss to Gain in an Industrial engineering Class” Journal of advanced Research in Production and Industrial engineering, 1(2), 1-12 [49] Vats T., Sujata (2015) “Lean Six Sigma Model to Improve Student Performance” International Journal of Computer Science and Technology, Vol. 6, Issue 2. [50] Vidya Yerneni, Jha S. (2013) “Can Operational Tools and Techniques be used to achieve excellence in Higher education system in India-An exploration” International Journal of Management and Strategy. Vol. 4, Issue 6.

1223

A Review Paper on Excellence in Engineering Education: Improving in Local Perspective (IJSRD/Vol. 4/Issue 04/2016/296)

[51] Viswanathan, K.G. (2009) “Performance under varied Management Styles – a Comparative Assessment of Engineering Education Programmes in India” International Business Research, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 117127. [52] Yu Kun-Tzu, Ueng Ren-Gen (2012) “Enhancing Teaching effectiveness by using the six sigma DMAIC Model”, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 37, No. 8, P 949-961. [53] Yerneni, V., Jha, S. (2013) “Can operational tools and techniques be used to achieve excellence in higher education system in India – an exploration” International Journal of management and Strategy (IJMS), Vol. 4, Issue 6, pp. 234-242. [54] Zeithaml, Parasuraman and Berry, Delivering Quality Service - Balancing Customer Perceptions and Expectations (New York: The Free Press), 1990.

1224