Shri Shankaracharya Institute of Professional Management and Technology, Raipur
Logo
Banner
SHRI SHANKARACHARYA RAIPUR

Civil Engineering

About The Department

The department has evolved significantly since its inception in the year 2009. It has marked its presence in the state of Chhattisgarh in a short span for quality education giving best performances in university results, higher studies and placements. The department has well qualified and experienced faculties and state of art laboratories. Towards further improvement the department is now focusing on R& D and consultancy projects by collaborating with industries and government agencies.

For more information about the department please click here - https://sites.google.com/ssipmt.com/civ-dep-ssipmt/home


    • PEO
    • PSO
    • PO
    • Faculty Profile
    • Laboratories
    • Teaching-learning
    • Placements
    • Achievements
    • Self Learning
    • Feedback
    • CO

    Program Educational Objective

    1. Graduates can build up technical & research skills to study civil Engineering problems and be able to effectively apply in practice & deliver innovative solutions.

    2. Graduates will be capable of working effectively and ethically in a professional environment for sustainable development.

    3. Graduates will successfully achieve jobs in government and private sector and also develop leadership skill and emerge as an entrepreneur.

    PSO-Program Specific Outcomes

    By the completion of Civil Engineering program the student will have the following Program Specific Outcomes

    PSO1 Understanding and applying the knowledge of survey, estimation, and design concerned with civil engineering projects, to undertake supervision of construction projects &assist design consultants in the construction industry.
    PSO2 Inspiring students to understand the impact of water, wastewater appropriate use of resources and waste management to take a vital part in the decision making and execution of activities related to sustainable infrastructural development.

    PROGRAM OUTCOMES

    • Engineering Knowledge: Apply the knowledge of mathematics, science, engineering fundamentals, and an engineering specialization to the solution of complex engineering problems.
    • Problem Analysis:Identify, formulate, research literature, and analyze complex engineering problems reaching substantiated conclusions using first principles of mathematics, natural sciences, and engineering sciences.
    • Design & Development of Solutions: Design solutions for complex engineering problems and design system components or processes that meet the specified needs with appropriate consideration for the public health and safety, and the cultural, societal, and environmental considerations.
    • Investigations of Complex Problems: Use research-based knowledge and research methods including design of experiments, analysis, and interpretation of data, and synthesis of the information to provide valid conclusions.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • Environment and Sustainability: Understand the impact of professional engineering solutions in societal and environmental contexts, and demonstrate the knowledge of, and the need for sustainable development.
    • Ethics: Apply ethical principles and commit to professional ethics and responsibilities and norms of the engineering practice.
    • Individual and Team Work: Function effectively as an individual, and as a member or leader in diverse teams, and in multidisciplinary settings.
    • Communication: Communicate effectively on complex engineering activities with the engineering community and with society at large, such as being able to comprehend and write effective reports and design documentation, make effective presentations, and give and receive clear instructions.
    • Project Management and Finance: Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the engineering and management principles and apply these to one’s own work, as a member and leader in a team, to manage projects and in multidisciplinary environments.
    • Life-long 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.
    S.No. Faculty Name Qualification Designation Date of Joining in
    the Institution
    Nature of Association
    (Regular/ Contract)
    Department
    1 Dr. Alok Kumar Jain Ph.D. Professor (Principal) 23-Dec-13 Regular Civil
    2 Dr. P.S. Charpe Ph.D. Professor 1-Sep-17 Regular Civil
    3 Mr. Nishant Yadav M.Tech Associate Professor 13-Jun-08 Regular Civil
    4 Mr. Manish Sakhlecha M.E Associate Professor (HoD) 13-Dec-14 Regular Civil
    5 Mr. Himanshu Shrivastava M.E. Assistant Professor 1-Jul-16 Regular Civil
    6 Mrs. Sima Padamwar M.Tech Assistant Professor 18-Jan-16 Regular Civil
    7 Mr. Abhishek Anand M.Tech Assistant Professor 2-Jul-18 Regular Civil
    8 Mr. Aman Agrawal M.Tech Assistant Professor 1-Sep-17 Regular Civil
    9 Mr. Honey Gaur M.E. Assistant Professor 1-Aug-17 Regular Civil
    10 Mr. Nikhil Bajpayee M.Tech Assistant Professor 3-Dec-18 Regular Civil
    11 Mr. P. Sagar M.Tech Assistant Professor 1-Sep-17 Regular Civil
    12 Ms. Parul Vinze M.Tech Assistant Professor 6-Sep-18 Regular Civil
    13 Mr. Parvez Alam M.Tech Assistant Professor 2-Jul-13 Regular Civil
    14 Mr. Rohan Parihar M.Tech Assistant Professor 1-Sep-17 Regular Civil
    15 Mr. Santosh Singh Thakur M.Tech Assistant Professor 1-Sep-17 Regular Civil
    16 Mr. Toshan Singh Rathour M.Tech Assistant Professor 7-Jul-17 Regular Civil
    17 Mr. Divyarth Manas Tiwari B.Tech Lecturer 21-Aug-18 Regular Civil
    18 Mr. Neeraj Tiwari M.Tech Assistant Professor 29-Jun-15 Regular Civil-1st Year
    19 Mr. Amit Patel BE Assistant Professor 1-Jun-14 Regular Civil-1st Year
    20 Ms. Pratiksha Agrawal M.Tech Assistant Professor 1-Feb-18 Regular Civil-1st Year

    List of Laboratories

    S.No. NAME OF LABORATORY AREA SQ FT TOTAL INVESTMENT LAB INCHARGE Lab Technician
    1 Surveying field work 420 2.00 Lakhs MR. P. Sagar
    M.Tech str
    Sameer Khan
    Lab instructor
    2 Fluid Mechanics 1660 Shared with ME PARUL VINZE,
    M.TECH WRE, NIT,R
    MR. SANJAY KUMAR PRAJAPATI
    LAB INSTRUCTOR
    3 Material Testing 846 2.20 Lakhs MR. HONEY GAUR
    M.TECH (STR)
    RAJU LAL SAHU
    LAB INSTRUCTOR
    4 Engineering Geology 420 0.56 Lakhs PRATIKSHA AGRAWAL
    M.TECH
    MR. PARAS RAM DEWANGAN
    LAB INSTRUCTOR
    5 TRANSPORTATION
    ENGINEERING
    999 5.08 Lakhs Mr. PARVEZ ALAM
    M.TECH (STR)
    MR. KRISHNA SAHU
    LAB INSTRUCTOR
    6 DRAWING LAB + AUTO CAD 1364 2.50 Lakhs MR. NIKHIL BAJPAYEE,
    M.TECH
    MR. NITESH SAHU
    LAB INSTRUCTOR
    7 SED LAB 1364 17.30 Lakhs MRS. SEEMA PADAMWAR MR. NITESH SAHU
    Lab instructor
    8. Environmental Lab Shared with Applied Chemistry Shared with Applied Chemistry Abhishek Anand Pawan Banjare
    Lab instructor
    9. Geotech Lab 1008 Sq. ft. 7.7 Lakh Santosh Singh Parihar
    MTech Structure

    Sameer Khan
    Lab instructor

    10 CONCRETE 846 2.20 Lakhs MR. HONEY GAUR
    M.TECH (STR)
    RAJU LAL SAHU LAB
    INSTRUCTOR

    Technical Staff

    S.No. Name Designation Qualification
    1 Mr. Divarth Manas Demonstrator B.E (Civil), GATE Qualified
    2 Mr. Jitendar Singh Demonstrator B.E (Civil), GATE Qualified
    3 Mr. Krishna Sahu Lab Instructor Diploma Civil
    4 Mr. Sameer Khan Lab Instructor 12th, Dip Civil (pur)
    5 Mr. Nitish Kumar Sahu Lab Instructor ITI Electrical, AUTO CAD
    6 Mr. Vivek Sahu Lab Instructor Diploma in Civil
    7 Mr. Paras Ram Dewangan Lab Instructor B.Sc
    8 Mr. Raju Lal Sahu Lab Instructor Diploma in Civil
    9 Mr. Nutan Kumar Sahu DEO Non Academic Staff
    10 Mr. Basant Kumar Sahu Peon Non Academic Staff
    No. of Faculty 16
    No. of Supporting Staff 10
    No. of Students 280
    No. of Staff Rooms 07
    No. of Class Rooms 07
    No. of Tutorial Rooms 01
    No. of Labs 10
    No. of Seminar Halls 01
    Department Library 01

    Find the Calendar for the Academic year Jan-June 2019 here.

    Guidelines for the paper setter

    Quality of internal semester Question papers, Assignments and Evaluation (20)

    A. Process for internal semester question paper setting and evaluation and effective process implementation (5)
    B. Process to ensure questions from outcomes/learning levels perspective (5)
    C. Evidence of COs coverage in class test / mid-term tests (5)
    D. Quality of Assignment and its relevance to COs (5)

    Documentation required to Exhibit:

    A) Process of internal semester question paper setting, model answers, evaluation and its compliance

    B) Question paper validation to ensure desired standard from outcome attainment perspective as well as learning levels perspective

    C) Mapping of questions with the Course outcomes

    D) Assignments to promote self-learning, survey of contents from multiple sources, assignment evaluation and feedback to the students, mapping with the COs

    A) General Guidelines to the Paper Setter(s)

    1) Make sure you have the latest version of the syllabus and you are familiar with the assessment criteria.

    2) Work on a Specification Grid. Before and after setting the paper, check that all the test items are based on the respective syllabus and that the items are graded in difficulty.

    paper paper

    3) Develop a Marking Scheme alongside the Specification Grid.

    Total Marks Section A 20 Marks Question A is compulsory
    Answerany two out of
    three questions (B,C,D)
    Q.1
    A 4 marks | Compulsory
    B , C , D = 8 Marks each
    40 Section B 20 Marks Q.2
    A 4 marks | Compulsory
    B , C , D = 8 Marks each

    4) Check that the duration of the examination is entered correctly on the paper and that the time allotted is sufficient to enable the students complete the paper and revise their work.

    5) Proof read the text.

    6) Pass on the finalized draft of the paper to HoD/ departmental CT coordinator who has to proof read the text again, ensure that no test item is out of syllabus, check that all set tasks are workable and that the paper can be completed in the set time.

    7) Hand in the Examination Paper for printing.

    8) CT exam superintendent must examine printed papers for printing defects (e.g. unclear diagrams or pictures) and for any Errata Corrige that may be required.

    B) Layout

    1. The layout of the paper should be as clear as possible to make it as student friendly as possible. (For write-on papers enough space for working or writing must be provided)* For aptitude test.

    2. Instructions to candidates should be clear and unambiguous. They should be presented in bold type.

    3. Wherever possible, use a straightforward and consistent format with regular line lengths.

    4. Use typesetting features such as bold, italics, indentation or boxes effectively to help candidates focus their attention on the task.

    5. Long complex questions are best split up by the use of subsidiary numbering systems.

    6. Structured questions should follow a graded and logical sequence.

    7. The information contained on a page should be well structured through the appropriate use of headings and sub-headings. This would help candidates organize text in advance of reading.

    8. Check that the diagrams, pictures or photographs used are necessary, helpful and of high quality.

    9. Place the text close to the relevant diagrams or pictures to enable the candidates relate the two effectively. Comprehension text and questions should be set on the same page or on adjacent pages.

    10. Ensure that marks assigned for each item / exercise / section are clearly indicated on the paper.

    11. Use Arial font with size 12 & 11 for heading and sub headings with suitable paragraph and line settings. The paper should be properly aligned and justified.

    C) Sentence Construction

    1. Use the simplest language and structure possible to convey clearly and unambiguously the meaning of the question.

    2. Split down even relatively short sentences if they contain a lot of condensed information.

    3. Do not use the passive if it can be avoided because it can make a sentence impersonal and complex. Avoid also using the conditional form (sentences starting with “if”) and the double negative.

    4. Eliminate superfluous words and any abstract and metaphorical language which is not necessary.

    5. Make sure that introductory statements in questions contain only the information which is required for answering those questions relevantly.

    D) Specification Grids:

    1. The writing of test items should be guided by a carefully prepared set of test specifications.

    2. The specifications describe the achievement domain being measured and provide guidelines for obtaining a representative sample of test tasks.

    3. The specification grid (a two-way table) provides assurance that the test will measure a representative sample of the learning outcomes and the subject matter topics to be measured.

    4. The specification grid relates outcomes to content and indicates the relative weight to be given to each of the various areas.

    5. A specification grid indicates: (i) The learning outcomes to be tested (ii) The subject matter or content area (iii) The assigned weighting to the learning outcomes and content areas in terms of their relative importance

    6. The learning outcomes to be tested include (a) Recall of knowledge, (b) Intellectual abilities or skills (understanding, application, etc) (c) General skills (eg. practical, performance, communication), (d) Attitudes, interests, appreciations.

    7. The following factors are to be considered when assigning relative weights to each learning outcome and each content area. (i) The importance of each area in the total learning experience (ii) The time devoted to each area during the learning experience (ii) Which outcomes have the greater retention and transfer value

    E) Constructing Relevant Test Items

    The items used could be either selection-type or supply-type items. The selection-type items present the students with a set of possible responses from which they are to select the most appropriate answer. The supply-type item requires students to create and supply their own answers.

    Selection-type items include:

    Short answers, Essays (restricted responses, unrestricted responses)

    Supply-type items are easier to construct but more difficult to score.

    1. Use the item types that provide the most direct measures of student performance specified by the learning outcome.

    2. Avoid verbal associations that give away the answer.

    3. Avoid grammatical inconsistencies that eliminate wrong answers.

    4. Avoid specific determiners that make certain answers probable (e.g. sometimes) and others impossible (e.g. always).

    5. Avoid stereotyped or textbook phrasing of correct answers.

    6. Avoid material in an item that aids in answering another item.

    7. Avoid trick questions that might cause a knowledgeable student to focus on the wrong aspect of the task.

    8. Ensure that the difficulty level matches the intent of the learning outcome and the age group to be tested.

    9. Ensure that there is no disagreement concerning the answer. Typically the answer should be one that experts would agree on the correct or best answer.

    10. Write the test items far enough in advance that they can be later reviewed and modified as needed.

    11. Write more test items than called for by the test plan. This will enable you to discard weak or inappropriate items during the item review and make it easier to match the final set of items to the test specifications.

    12. The number of test items depends on the age of the students tested, the time available for testing, type of test items used and on the type of interpretation to be made. Experience in testing is frequently the only dependable guide for determining proper test length.

    13. Give due consideration to the best arrangement of the test items. Where possible, all items of the same type should be grouped together. The items should be arranged in terms of increasing difficulty.

    14. For Short-Answer items ensure that:

    i) the item calls for a single, brief answer

    ii) the item has been written as a direct question or a well-stated incomplete sentence

    iii) the desired response is related to the main point of the item

    iv) clues to the answer have been avoided (e.g. "a" or "an", length of the blank)

    v) the units and degree of precision is indicated for numerical answers.

    15. For Essay questions make sure that:

    i) questions starting questions with “who”, “what”, “when”, “where”, “name”, “list” are avoided as these terms limit the response

    ii) questions demanding higher order skills, such as those indicated in the following table (Gronlund: 2006, p.120), are used

    Some technical verbs commonly used for different testing objectives

    Objective Technical Terms eliciting the mentioned objective
    Comparing Compare, classify, describe, distinguish between, explain, outline, summarize
    Interpreting Convert, draw, estimate, illustrate, interpret, restate, summarize, Translate
    Inferring Derive, draw, estimate, extend, extrapolate, predict, propose, relate
    Applying Arrange, compute, describe, demonstrate, illustrate, rearrange, relate,
    Generalizing Construct, develop, explain, formulate, generate, make, propose, state
    Analyzing Break down, describe, diagram, differentiate, divide, list, outline, separate
    Evaluating Appraise, criticize, defend, describe, evaluate, explain, judge, write
    Creating Compose, design, devise, draw, formulate, make up, present, propose
    Synthesizing Arrange, combine, construct, design, rearrange, regroup, relate, write

    16. Use this table (Gronlund: 2006, p 63) to help you decide between selection-type and supply-type items:

    characteristic Selection Type Items Supply Type Items
    Measures factual information Yes Yes Yes
    Measures understanding Yes No Yes
    Measures Synthesis No No Yes
    Easy to construct No Yes Yes
    Samples broadly Yes Yes No
    Eliminates bluffing Yes No No
    Eliminates writing skills Yes No No
    Eliminates blind guessing No Yes Yes
    Easy to score Yes No No
    Scoring is objective Yes No No
    Pin points learning errors Yes Yes No
    Encourages Originality No No Yes
    *The essay test can measure knowledge of facts, but because of scoring and sampling problems it probably should not be used for this purpose.
    ** These items can be designed to measure limited aspects of these characteristics.

    F) Marking Schemes Marking schemes should:

    1. Be clear and designed to be easily and consistently applied;

    2. Allocate marks in proportion with the demands of questions;

    3. Include the mark allocation for each question and parts of a question, with a more detailed breakdown where necessary;

    4. Include an indication of the nature and range of responses likely to be worthy of credit and likely responses which would be unacceptable;

    5. State the acceptable responses to each question, or parts thereof, in sufficient detail to enable marking to be undertaken in a standardized manner;

    6. Provide guidance to help markers make judgments on alternative answers;

    7. Allow credit to be allocated for what candidates know, understand and can do;

    8. Include marking instructions for assessing quality of written communication, where applicable.

    Some important principles with respect to marking schemes:

    1. The total number of marks available for each question and each part of a question should be shown in the mark scheme and must tally with the marks shown on the question paper.

    2. Each mark should reflect equal demand.

    3. All marking should be positive, and as far as possible candidates should gain credit for valid answers and not lose credit for incorrect or irrelevant answers.

    Marking schemes must encourage the examiner to use the full range of marks available. Full marks should be available for a level of achievement appropriate to able candidates of the relevant age rather than for a theoretical perfect answer.

    G) Checklist (Gronlund: 2006, p 69) for Reviser for Evaluating the Test Paper

    Checklist for Evaluating the Test Paper Yes No
    Balance

    The items measure a representative sample of the learning outcomes

    The allocation of marks to each item reflects the item difficulty

    Relevance The items present relevant tasks which reflect the current syllabus
    Conciseness The items and tasks are stated in simple, clear language
    Soundness

    The items are of the proper difficulty, free of defects and have answers that are defensible

    Questions do not contain gender, cultural or religious bias

    Independence The items are free from overlapping, so that one item does not aid in answering another
    Arrangement The items measuring the same outcome are grouped together and are in order of increasing difficulty
    Numbering The items are numbered in order throughout the test paper
    Instructions

    There are clear, concise instructions for each part in the whole test paper

    There are directions for how to record answers

    The time limit is specified

    Spacing The spacing on the page contributes to ease of reading and responding
    Typing

    The final copy is free of typographical errors.

    The marks for the whole paper add up to the total number of marks specified in the syllabus

    9. Ensure that the questions developed cover all the testing objectives, content area and subtopic

    10. Relate outcomes to content and indicate the learning outcomes to be tested

    Topic Knowledge Comprehensive Application Analysis Synthesis Evaluation Total
    Question 1a. (2marks) 0.5 0.5 0 0 0 1 2
    Question 1b. (7marks) 2 4 1 0 1 7
    Measures Synthesis No No Yes Measures Synthesis No No Yes
    Question 1c. (7marks) 2 0 0 5 0 0 7
    Question 1d. (7marks) 3 1 1 1 1 7

    11. When assigning relative weights to topic and sub-topic the overall distribution of marks may be adhered to.

    12. Ensure that there is no dispute over the validity of the answer provided.Answer should be such that experts agree on it

    13. In comprehension questions, there should be a sequential development in accordance with passage. Questions should not be in random order.

    14. For Short-Answer items ensure that

    i) the item calls for a single, brief answer

    ii) The desired answer is related to the main point of the question

    iii) Clues to the answer have been avoided

    15. There are two different categories of Short Answer Type Questions, i.e. SA-I questions bearing one/two marks and SA-II questions bearing three/four marks. The answer of SA-I must have two or four value points and similarly answer of SA-II must have three or six value points

    16. For Long Answer type questions make sure that:

    i) Questions starting with “who”, “what”, “when”, “where”, “name”, “list” are avoided as these terms limit the response

    ii) Questions demanding higher order skills, such as those indicated in the following table are used

    17. The Long Answer Type questions can be of five/six/seven/eight marks. Ensure that answer of such questions must have proportionate value points

    Rubrics for TA marks- Practical

    RUBRICS FOR PRACTICAL SESSIONAL MARKS

    The total sessional marks for practical is 20. This 20 marks is further subdivided based on the following criterions:-

    1) As per the guidelines by the University the practical record books of the students should be complete with minimum 10 experiments written along with the calculations. This criteria carries a total of 10 marks out of 20

    2) Timely submission of the record book by the student carries 3 marks.

    3) The Viva- Voce exam carries a total of 5 marks.

    4) Proper handling of equipments while performing the experiments carries a total of 2 marks.

    RUBRICS FOR PRACTICAL SESSIONAL MARKS

    SESSION :
    SUBJECT NAME:
    REVIEWED BY:
    Marks (Total 20 Marks)
    CRITERIA
    Completion of Records( 10) @ of 1 marks per experiment
    Timely Submission (3)
    Record submitted within 2 working days after completion of experiment 3 marks
    Record submitted within 7 working days after completion of experiment 1 marks
    There after 0 marks
    Viva-Voce (5)
    Able to answer analyse the result 5 marks
    Able to answer application realted questions 4 marks
    Able to answer advance questions 3 marks
    Able to answer basic questions 2 marks
    Able to attempt to answer basic questions but with out proper explaination 1 marks
    Absent/ Unable to answer 0 marks
    Handling of Equipments (2) As per Lab attendant recommendation based on student atitude

    RUBRICS FOR SESSIONAL MARKS (THEORY)

    (TA: Teacher’s Assessment Marks)

    Total sessional marks is 20

    The 20 marks is further divided into three criterions-

    i) Attendance – 12 Marks

    ii) Assignment- 5 Marks

    iii) Class Interaction- 3 Marks

    If the attendance is >90%, we give 100% weightage which carries 12 marks.

    If the attendance is between 85-90 %, we give 90% weightage which carries 10-11 marks.

    If the attendance is 75%, we give 80% weightage which carries 8-10 marks.

    If the attendance is< 75%, we take remedial action against the student which includes extra classes upto 20 days in preparation leave with prior permission from the principal.

    Class interaction carries a total of 3 marks which consists the following qualities:-

    1) Attitude of the student

    2) Class Presence

    3) Promptness in the subject

    RUBRICS FOR SESSIONAL MARKS

    SESSION :
    SUBJECT NAME:
    REVIEWED BY:
    Marks (Total 20 Marks)
    CRITERIA
    ATTENDANCE ( 12 MARKS) 90%(12 marks) 85%(10-11 marks) 75%( 8-10 marks) <75%(Remedial action)
    ASSIGNMENT ( 5 MARKS)
    CLASS INTERACTION (3 MARKS)

    Process of Awarding Internal Semester Examination

    1) Two internal semester exam referred to as Class test of 40 marks are conducted in each semester.

    2) The questions paper is set as per the guidelines of institute.

    3) After evaluation of answer sheet the answers copies are shared and discussed with the students.

    4) The worksheet of result analysis is forwarded to the Principal for further evaluation, guidelines and remedial actions.

    5) After completion of the semester a worksheet with student’s CT marks are entered.

    6) The Rubrics for award of CT marks are as under.

    7) Compliance with the guidelines under special cases from the Head of Institute.

    CT-I
    X/40
    CT-II
    Y/40
    Marks awarded
    X and Y are the marks secured by the student in CT1 and CT2 respectively
    Pass in both CT. Y greater than 40% best of two CT marks are considered for awarding CT marks.
    Fail/ Abs in one CT. Best of two CT marks are considered for awarding CT marks.
    3 Fail in both CT. Best of two CT marks are considered for awarding CT marks.
    Case 4 Abs in both CT.

    The case will be reported to the Principal on his recommendation necessary remedial action will be taken.

    Or Zero Marks will be awarded

    CT Marks CT marks awarded.
    >80% 100% marks awarded
    >70% <80% 90% marks awarded
    >60% <70% 80% marks awarded
    >50%<60% 70% marks awarded
    >40%<50% 60% marks awarded
    >30% <40% 50% marks awarded
    >20% <30% 40% marks awarded
    >10% <20% 30% marks awarded
    >10% <15% 20% marks awarded
    <10% 10% marks awarded

    RUBRICS FOR VALUATION OF ASSIGNMENT

    Based on the totality, relevant content and presentation of the questions solved by the individual student a maximum of 3 marks may be awarded.

    If the student submits the assignment on the given date considering the punctuality of the student 2 marks may be awarded.

    For incomplete or substandard submission the marks and grades may be decrease accordingly. ( Grade B, C And D)(Marks 4,3 And <3)

    RUBRICS FOR ASSIGNMENT EVALUATION

    GUIDELINES FOR SETTING OF ASSIGNMENT QUESTIONS

    The questions are framed according to the Blooms Taxonomy.

    Assignment questions should so designed that all the Course Outcomes are addressed.

    To ensure smooth process following activities have been finalized in three phases.

    Task Particulars
    Phase 1 Call for the project Rule, regulation, and area of the guide are displayed on the departmental notice board.
    Batch and guide Allotment. Students refer notice board to finalize project title and guide.
    Synopsis Submission Introduction, abstract, Literature review etc. to be covered in the report in synopsis (format to be given by Project coordinator)
    Phase 2 Second Phase Seminar & Evaluation Project coordinator arrange the seminar of each project groups in presence of project committee formed and Evaluation to be done based on design methodology used
    Phase 3 Presentation of project plan and finalization. Students give Final project seminar before submission as advised by faculties/guide for correction if any and submit the report. Evaluation to be done based on Content of the project report.

    Allocation of Project

    chat

    RUBRICS FOR MAJOR PROJECT

    ReviewAgendaAssessmentReview assessment weightage
    Phase 1 reviewProject Synopsis/Proposal EvaluationRubric R120
    Phase 2 reviewMid Term project Evaluation-Design Methodology, PresentationRubric R220
    Phase 3 reviewEnd semester project evaluationRubric R340
    External EvaluationQuestions and AnswerRubric R420
    Total100
    Rubric #R1: Project Synopsis/ Proposal Evaluation Maximum Marks*: 20
    Excellent(15)Good(13)Average(12)Acceptable (10)Unacceptable (8)Score
    Identification of project area with Feasibility of project proposal (innovative, creative and ethical)Detailed and extensive explanation of the purpose and need of the projectGood explanation of the purpose and need of the projectAverage explanation of the purpose and need of the projectModerate explanation of the purpose and need of the projectMinimal explanation of the purpose and need of the project
    Objectives and Methodology of the proposed workAll objectives of the proposed work are well defined, problems are clearly specifiedgood justification of objectives and MethodologyIncomplete justificationonly some objectives identifiedObjectives not identified well
    societal and environmental contextsProject topic is fully relevant to the need of Sustainable developmentProject topic is in good relevance to the need of Sustainable development Project topic is in good relevance to the need of Sustainable development up to some extent
    Excellent(5)Good(4)Average (3)Acceptable (2)Unacceptable (1)Score
    Demonstration and presentation

    1) Objectives properly mentioned

    2) Appropriate contents of presentation

    3) Excellent Communication skills

    1) Objectives properly mentioned

    2) Appropriate contents of presentation but not well arranged

    3) Good Communication skills

    1) Objectives properly mentioned

    2) Appropriate contents of presentation but not well arranged

    3) presentation not satisfactory

    1) Objectives properly mentioned

    2) contents of presentation is not appropriate

    3) presentation not satisfactory

    1) Objectives properly mentioned

    2) contents of presentation is not appropriate

    3) poor delivery of presentation

    Rubric #R2: Mid-term Project Evaluation Maximum Marks*: 20
    Excellent (10)Good (9)Average (8)Acceptable (7)UnacceptableScore
    Design Methodology

    1) Division of problem into modules

    2) Appropriate Design Methodology and properly justification

    1) Division of problem into modules

    2) Design Methodology not properly justified

    1) Division of problem into modules

    2) Design Methodology not defined properly

    1) Division of problem into modules

    2) Design Methodology not defined properly

    1) Division of problem into modules

    2) Design Methodology not defined

    Planning of project work and Team structure

    1) Time frame properly specified and being followed

    2) Appropriate distribution of project work

    1) Time frame properly specified and being followed

    2) Distribution of project work inappropriate

    1) Time frame properly specified but not being followed

    2) Distribution of project work uneven

    1) Time frame properly specified but not being followed

    2) Distribution of project work uneven and no synchronization

    1) Time frame not properly specified

    2) inappropriate distribution of project work

    Excellent (10)Good (9)Average (8)Acceptable (7)UnacceptableScore
    Demonstration and presentation

    1) Objectives achieved as per time frame

    2) Appropriate contents of presentation

    3) Excellent Communication skills

    1) Objectives achieved as per time frame

    2) Appropriate contents of presentation but not well arranged

    3) Good Communication skills

    1) Objectives achieved as per time frame

    2) Appropriate contents of presentation but not well arranged

    3) presentation not satisfactory

    1) Objectives not achieved as per time frame

    2) contents of presentation is not appropriate

    3) presentation not satisfactory

    1) Objectives not achieved as per time frame

    2) contents of presentation is not appropriate

    3) poor delivery of presentation

    Rubric #R3: End Semester Internal Project Evaluation Maximum Marks*: 40
    Excellent (10)Good (9)Average (8)Acceptable (7)Unacceptable Score
    Incorporation of suggestionsChanges are made as per modifications suggested during phase 2 evaluation and new innovations addedChanges are made as per modifications suggested during phase 2 evaluation and good justificationall major Changes are made as per modifications suggested during phase 2 evaluationFew Changes are made as per modifications suggested during phase 2 evaluationNo modifications done as per the suggestions in phase2
    Project Report

    1) project report is according to the specified format

    2) References and citations are appropriate and well mentioned

    1) project report is according to the specified format

    2) References and citations are appropriate but not well mentioned

    1) project report is according to the specified format but some mistakes

    2) Insufficient References and citations

    1) project report is not fully according to the specified format

    2) Insufficient References and citations

    1) project report is not according to the specified format

    2) References and citations are not appropriate

    Excellent (20)Good (18) Average (8)Acceptable (15)Unacceptable Score
    Description of concept and technical detailsComplete explanation of the key concepts, strong description of technical requirements of the projectComplete explanation of the key concepts, In-sufficient description of the technical requirements of the projectComplete explanation of the key concepts, In-sufficient description of the technical requirements of the projectAll key concepts are not explained and very little relevance to literature Inappropriate explanation of the key concepts poor description of the technical requirements of the project
    Conclusion and Discussion

    1) Results are presented in very appropriate manner

    2) Project work is well summarized and concluded

    1) Results are presented in good manner

    2) Project work is not very appropriate

    1) Results are presented in good manner

    2) Project work is not very appropriate

    Excellent(10)Good(9)Average(8)Acceptable (7)UnacceptableScore
    Demonstration and presentation

    1) Objectives achieved as per time frame

    2) Appropriate contents of presentation

    3) Excellent Communication skills

    1) Objectives achieved as per time frame

    2) Appropriate contents of presentation but not well arranged

    3) Good Communication skills

    1) Objectives achieved as per time frame

    2) Appropriate contents of presentation but not well arranged

    3) presentation not satisfactory

    1) Objectives not achieved as per time frame

    2) contents of presentation is not appropriate

    3) presentation not satisfactory

    1) Objectives not achieved as per time frame

    2) contents of presentation is not appropriate

    3) poor delivery of presentation

    Rubric #R4: End Semester Internal Project Evaluation Maximum Marks*: 20
    Excellent(20)Good(18)Average (17)Acceptable (15)Unacceptable Score
    Viva (Questions and Answers)All the queries are well answered with proper explanationsAll the queries are well answered with sufficient explanationsMost of the queries are well answered with proper explanationsMost of the queries are well answered with sufficient explanationsOnly few of the queries are well answered with sufficient explanations

    BE Batch (2011-15)

    S.No. Name of the students placed Roll No. Name of the Employer
    1 Mr. Abhishek Kumar Pandey 3332011001 Shri Ram Transport Finance Company Ltd.Govt.Polytechnic Raipur
    2 Mr. Aklant Pati 3332011003 Genpact, IIFCO - Tokio
    3 Ms. Anchal Agrawal 3332011004 Genpact
    4 Ms. Anmol Sharma 3332011007 Tech Mahindra
    5 Mr. Archit Tamboli 3332011008 Shri Ram construction
    6 Mr. Arjun Sinha 3332011009 Shri Ram Transport Finance Company Ltd.
    7 Ms. Barkha Verma 3332011014 CIET Raipur
    8 Mr. Deepak Chandak 3332011017 Technical Assistant Menrega
    9 Mr. Gaurav Surana 3332011019 Avam consultant Raipur
    10 Ms. Kanika Tiwari 3332011021 Technical Assistant Menrega
    11 Mr. Fiazan ur Rahman 3332011022 L&T Chennai
    12 Ms. Nitisha Tiwari 3332011026 SSIPMT Raipur
    13 Mr. Palash agrawal 3332011027 PNC Infratech Ltd.( Assistant Engg.)
    14 Ms. Pooja Shandilya 3332011029 Tech Mahindra, Genpact
    15 Ms. Pooja Shandilya 3332011029 Indian Navy
    16 Sonam Verma 3332011042 Technical Assistant Menrega
    17 Mr. Vinay kumar veerwani 3332011044 Sub Engineer PWD
    18 Mr. Vivek Pahuja 3332011045 BIT Raipur
    19 Mr. Yash Duggad 3332011047 Shri Ram Transport Finance Company Ltd.,
    20 Mr. Kishan Chimnani 3332011057 NHAI
    21 Mr. Rajeev Gupta 3332011065 Avinash Group, Shri Ram Transport Finance Co Ltd.

    BE Batch (2012-16)

    S.No. Name of the students placed Roll No. Name of the Employer
    1 Mr. Mrigank Saurav 3332012001 SME Faculty (GATE ACADEMY Warangal)
    2 Mr. Sanandan Singh 3332012003 Pragati Construction Raipur
    3 Mr. Akash Sharma 3332012006 SHRIRAM
    4 Mr. Abhishek Chawla 3332012007 Tech Mahindra
    5 Mr. Anurag Kela 3332012011 Anandghan Construction Comp
    6 Mr. Gajendra Chandrakar 3332012015 Anandghan Construction Comp
    7 Mr. Mohammad Ahamad Raza 3332012019 Anandghan Construction Comp
    8 Mr. Mukesh Jaiswal 3332012020 Technical Assistant Menrega
    9 Mr. Rajveerchand Kaushik 3332012025 SUDA
    10 Ms. Rashmi Sharma 3332012026 Avam Construction
    11 Ms. Rishika Dixit 3332012027 Capgemini
    12 Mr. Shubham Awasthi 3332012031 Turner Project Management India PVT LTD. MH.
    13 Mr. Subhajeet Sen 3332012034 SHRIRAM
    14 Mr. Surya Kumar Soni 3332012036 BSBK
    15 Ms. Vaishali Bhargava 3332012040 Bechte Corporation Gurgaon Haryana
    16 Mr. Vikas Kumar Sahu 3332012044 BSBK
    17 Mr. Prashant Kumar Thakur 3332012046 BSBK
    18 Ravi Sahu 3332012050 BSBK
    19 Mr. Sidharth Gogia 3332012051 Capgemini, L&T
    20 Ms. Deepa Singh 3332012054 Capgemini
    21 Mr. Piyush Kukreja 3332012057 Tech Mahindra
    22 Mr. Sumit Gohil 3332012302 Nasir Khan Consultancy Raipur

    BE Batch (2013-17)

    S.No. Name of the students placed Roll No. Name of the Employer
    1 Mr. Ashish Hasija 3332013012 WRIG NANO SYS. PVT LTD.
    2 Mr. Babu Singh 3332013014 Anandghan Construction Comp.
    3 Mr. Kishan Lal Dhruw 3332013021 Anandghan Construction Comp.
    4 Ms. Meenal Nahar 3332013024 Mukesh Chabra & co. Bombay
    5 Mr. Nagesh Verma 3332013027 Technical Assistant Menrega
    6 Mr. Risahabh jain 3332013037 GENEPACT
    7 Mr. Rishabh Jain 3332013038 SYSMIX(JAPAN)
    8 Mr. RituRaj Upadhayay 3332013039 Technical Assistant Menrega Basna
    9 Mr. Sanjay chandrawanshi 3332013041 BSBK
    10 Ms. Shashi Dan 3332013043 Technical Assistant Menrega
    11 Mr. Umeshwar Diwan 3332013048 Technical Assistant Menrega
    12 Mr. Swapnil Mishra 3332013056 ACB Pvt.Ltd. BSP
    13 Ms. Harsha Okhade 3332013060 Structural Engineer Nagpur
    14 Mr. Harpreet Singh 3332013064 EPA Infrastructure
    15 Ms. Kajal Shrivas 3332013065 Technical Assistant Menrega

    Batchwise Academic Performance

    2010 - 2014 Batch

    Sucess Rate = 91.67

    3rd Sem - 59.8%

    4th Sem - 70%

    5th Sem - 73%

    6th Sem - 55%

    7th Sem - 80%

    8th Sem - 91.7%

    2011 - 2015 Batch

    Sucess Rate = 96.92

    3rd Sem - 78.7%

    4th Sem - 75.4%

    5th Sem - 68.3%

    6th Sem - 76.2%

    7th Sem - 83.8%

    8th Sem - 95.4%

    2012 - 2016 Batch

    Sucess Rate = 88.7

    3rd Sem - 41.9%

    4th Sem - 64.5%

    5th Sem - 79.0%

    6th Sem - 87.1%

    7th Sem - 81.9%

    8th Sem - 90.3%

    2013 - 2017 Batch

    Sucess Rate = 75.57

    3rd Sem - 57.6%

    4th Sem - 72.8%

    5th Sem - 66.1%

    6th Sem - 86.7%

    7th Sem - 80.7%

    8th Sem - 87.9%

    2014 - 2018 Batch

    Sucess Rate = 68.18

    3rd Sem - 61.2%

    4th Sem - 69.7%

    5th Sem - 56.4%

    6th Sem - 76.2%

    7th Sem - 69.8%

    8th Sem - 82.5%

    2015 - 2019 Batch

    3rd Sem - 38.5%

    4th Sem - 61.9%

    5th Sem - 51.2%

    6th Sem - 59.5%

    7th Sem - 77.3%


    University toppers

    1. Niralee verma (2013 batch)
    2. Sandeep Goel (2013)
    3. Rajani soni (2014 batch)
    4. pragya Agrawal (2014 batch)
    5. Vaishali Tiwari (2015)
    6. Rishika Dixit (2015)
    7. Vidhi Chopda (2016)
    8. Vasihanvi Agrawal (2016)

    HIGHER STUDIES (In IITs, IISc, Foreign University)

    NAME OF STUDENT IIT /IISCS
    NIRALI VERMA M.Tech, IIT KHARAGPUR
    PRASAN SONI M.Tech, IIT BOMBAY
    PRAGYA AGRWAL M.Tech, IIT BOMBAY
    TIKAM THAKUR M.Tech, IISC BANGLORE
    ABHISHEK CHAWLA M.Tech, IIT BHUWNESHWAR
    RISHABH JAIN M.Tech, IIT BOMBAY
    ALANKRITA GADODIYA M.Tech, IIT GUWAHATI
    YASH DUGGAD PhD, IIT GANDHINAGAR
    PRINCE RAJ SAHU MS, UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS ARLINGTON
    VIVEK VERMA M.S, CANADA

    ALUMNI PLACED IN GOVERNMENT SECTOR

    S. No. Name of Student Batch Department
    1 Niralee Verma 2009-2013 Asst. Professor, GEC Raipur
    2 Sandeep Goyel 2009-2013 Asst. Professor, GEC Raipur
    3 Deepak Sambhakar 2009-2013 Lecturer Govt. Polytechnic
    4 Vijendra Gupta 2009-2013 Sub Engineer Nagar Nigam
    5 Satyendra Sahu 2009-2013 Sub Engineer PWD
    6 Peeyush Rajput 2009-2013 Sub Engineer Nagar Nigam, Korba
    7 Akansha Sahu 2009-2013 Sub Er. Nagar Nigam, Takhatpur
    8 Satish Sahu 2009-2013 Sub Engineer PWD
    9 Divya Warlyani 2009-2013 Sub Engineer Nagar Nigam
    10 Sagar Thakur 2010-2014 Sub Engineer Nagar Nigam
    11 Tikam Singh Thakur 2010-2014 NMDC Jagdalpur Plant
    12 Shilpa Daga 2010-2014 Sub Engineer Nagar Nigam Raipur
    13 Sanskaar Sharma 2010-2014 Sub Engineer Nagar Nigam Raipur
    14 Hitesh Singh Thakur 2010-2014 Sub Engineer Nagar Nigam Raipur
    15 Anjali Sahu 2010-2014 Sub Engineer Nagar Nigam Raipur
    16 Sunny Tiwari 2010-2014 Sub Engineer Nagar Nigam Raipur
    17 Ajay Maravi 2010-2014 Sub Engineer Nagar Nigam Raipur
    18 Vinay Virwani 2011-2015 Sub Engineer PWD Raipur
    19 Rituraj Upadhyay 2013-2017 Sub Engineer PMGSY Raipur
    20 Umeshwar Diwan 2013-2017 Sub Engineer PMGSY Raipur
    21 Shashi Dan 2013-2017 Sub Engineer PMGSY Raipur
    22 Kajal Srivas 2013-2017 Sub Engineer PMGSY Raipur
    23 Vaibhav Chandrakar 2013-2017 Sub Engineer PMGSY Raipur

    Department results

    (January-june2015)

    4th sem-72.88
    6th sem-88.6
    8th sem-95.45

    (July2015-january2016)

    3rd sem-62.12
    5th sem 67.2
    7th sem 83.63

    Tecnology Raipur

    GATE 2016

    Abhishek chawla
    Mrigank saurav
    Himanshu chandrakar
    Rajesh chauhan
    Danish azim
    Sanjhee shrivastava
    Ambuj grover
    Siddharth gogia

    GATE 2015

    Vinay Kumar Veerwani
    Mohd faizan ur rahman
    Yash duggad
    Ashish kumar panjwani

    GATE 2014

    Pragya agrawal
    Tikam singh Thakur
    Praveen sahu
    Ajita pandey
    Hitesh Thakur
    Sagar Thakur
    Anjali sahu
    Amitesh bajpai

    GATE 2013

    Niralee Verma
    Sandeep soni
    Sandeep goel
    Ankita gangwani
    Satish sahu
    Prasann soni

    Placed Students of 2016

    Department of Civil Engineering

    RISHIKA DIXIT (CAPGEMINI)
    DEEPA SINGH (CAPGEMINI, MOTIF)
    SIDHARTH GOGIA (CAPGEMINI, Tech Mahindra)
    PIYUSH KUKREJA (Tech Mahindra)
    ABHISHEK CHAWLA (Tech Mahindra)
    PALAK SURI (Tech Mahindra)
    SUBHAJEET SEN (Sri Ram T&F)
    AAKASH SHARMA (Sri Ram T&F)
    PRIYANKA RATHIA (Tech Mahindra)
    NIKHIL MATLANI (GENPACT)

    Placed Students of 2015

    Pooja shandilya (tech mahindra)
    Anmol sharma (tech mahindra)
    Aklant pati (genpact)
    Anchal agrawal(genpact)
    Pooja shandilya (genpact)
    Yash duggad (Shri Ram Transport Finance)
    Arjun sinha (Shri Ram Transport Finance)
    Rajeev gupta (Shri Ram Transport Finance)
    Abhishek pandey (Shri Ram Transport Finance)

    Selected in Nicmar 2016