Teaching quality to engineering students is a challenge. They have strong quantitative skills but may lack in soft skills . This presentation is an abridged version of the presentation I gave at ANQ congress in Delhi in 2010. Should we consider students as products of teaching-learning process or customers or co-producers in traversing the quality journey?

1. Experiences of Teaching
Quality in Higher Technical
Institutes
Dr S G Deshmukh
Director
ABV- Indian Institute of Information Technology &
Management , Gwalior
ANQ Congress, 20 Oct 2010

2. Outline of the presentation
• Background
• About TQM course at IIT Delhi
• Features
• Observations and Insights
• Learnings and concluding remarks

3. Background to the course
• Curriculum designed jointly by IIT Delhi,
Industry associations and industry
• Focus on applications of TQM
• Emphasis on “Learning-by-doing”
through the framework of Plan-Do-
Check-Act (PDCA).
• Offered as an elective for all disciplines at IIT Delhi
• It is 3-0-2 course (meaning 3 lecture hours + 2 lab
hours per week) : In all 42 lecture hours + 28 lab
hours, total of 70 Hours)

4. Course Design
Concept Through
Customer satisfaction Regular feedback, change in behavior,
acknowledgement from them
Team working and
syndicate exercises [
Discussions in labs, a variety of
assignments, open-ended exercises
etc.
Focus on softer aspects of
TQM
By sensitizing students about team
work, leadership, group dynamics ,
difficulties in implementing TQM etc.
Continuous process
evaluation and
improvements
Feedback, field level improvements
actually carried out

5. MEL420: Total Quality Management
Course Goals
To enable students to
• Appreciate importance of quality and its historical
evolution
• Understand continual improvement, customer
satisfaction, process improvement and total
organizational involvement;
• Understand both technical and philosophical issues
surrounding quality management;
• Apply quantitative and qualitative tools and
techniques in appropriate ways to investigate and
ultimately resolve product or service quality
concerns; and,
• Evaluate use of TQM initiatives, tools, and
techniques

6. Pre-launching activities
• CII, FICCI ,
ASSOCHAM , NPC, BIS
involved
• Visit to European
universities, Industry and
other IITS
• Brainstorming sessions
for designing the course
contents
• Maruti, Escorts, Eicher,
Nucleus Software,
SAIL,BHEL etc. involved
• Train-the-trainer
programme for faculty
• Resource material (Video
films, cases, work sheets)
donated by EU
• Pilot testing & feedback

7. Methodology
of Teaching-Learning Process
• Lecture sessions
• Hands-on lab
sessions
• Case studies
• Video films
• Computer simulations
• Guest lectures from
industry
• Industry visits
• Mini-projects
Quiz Minor
Tests
Major
Test
Mini-
Project
Lab Book Review
etc.
5 % 25% 35% 15 % 15 % 5 %

8. TQM principles applied..
Involvement of all Design of course contents involved faculty, and industry
and feedback from alumni.
Customer focus Student interest and excitement kept in view while
making the course contents interesting
Continuous
improvement
Course contents, method of delivery, mode of
interaction improved based on the feedback received
form time to time from various stakeholders.
Conventional use of blackboard and overhead
projection to multi-media and web based tools.
Team working Lab content, mini-project and diary through team effort.
Each team was given a name to reflect the character
and spirit of the team.
Leadership Head of the institution actively involved getting support
from industry and industry associations
Head of the department and other staff supported for
making resources available

9. Innovations…
• Stimulating assignments ( 7 QC tools, on
bad designs, poka-yoke, QFD) and case
studies
• Emphasis on syndicate exercises and
Open ended assignments
• Project component helps to relate real life
experiences in and around
• Technology enabled
Poka yoke for : Registration process at IITD,
Items such school bag, LCD projector

10. Outcomes of the learnings !
• Mini-Projects
– Paper by students won
award (for example:
Gold medal in IIIE )
– Resulted in improved
procedures for
hospital, dept library,
layout for sections
– Improved morale !

11. Measurement of performance
Related to Brief description Evidence
Faculty Number of papers published,
case studies developed,
Resource material (books/CDs)
developed
Various case studies developed,
Resource material in terms of ppt slides
Help in Placement
of students
Assistance provided by the
course in placement
Helped to place at least 20 % of students
due to exposure to the course
New companies came for campus
placement
Growth % growth in enrollment for the
course, Number of self-
financed students enrolled,
increase in course coverage
Growth in enrollment
Utilization of
intellect
Number of ideas coming out of
mini-project which are
implemented in hostel, work –
shop etc.
Layout of postgraduate office changed, web
based registration process , streamlined the
departmental library issue/receipt process
etc.

12. Measurement of performance..
Feedback from students
On Methodology..
Sn Item Score with
Maximum
Of 5
1 Organization, clarity and
presentation of
fundamental concepts
4.16
2 Instructor’s attitude towards
teaching
4.56
3 Experiments provided new
insights
4.34
4 Overall laboratory experience 4.01
5 Overall quality of teaching 4.36
On Concepts
Sn Concept Score
1 Motivation 4.40
2 5-S & House Keeping 4.23
3 Internal/External customers 4.23
4 QC tools 4.20
5 PDCA 4.10
6 SQC 4.08
7 Definition of Quality 4.05
8 Group Dynamics & Leadership 4.03
9 TPM 3.90
10
Difference between QC, QA,
TQM 3.80

13. Teaching/learning
• Student interaction with faculty and other
students is an essential characteristic and
is facilitated in a variety of ways, including
email, e-groups.
• Feedback to students on assignments and
questions is constructive and provided in a
timely manner.
Quality is about systemic change.
Motivate students to act as change catalysts

14. Observations..
• Definition of "customer" is a buyer of a product or service.
The student certainly fits this definition of the world
"customer".
• Student is buying course and has certain expectations such
as : Relevant course content, fairness, access, expertise,
and a reasonable learning situation. External customers
(such as in a typical manufacturing situation) have the
freedom to choose their supplier. This is not true for internal
customers in education. They are stuck. They must use their
given service provider, because it is their only option.
• This lack of competition frequently may breed contempt for
internal customers. Students rarely know what they need.
• This also means certain “commercial transaction” for which a
faculty may not be mentally prepared.
• Defining quality under such circumstances becomes a
difficult and challenging task, which may lead to the
perception that the student is not the customer, but is the
product. Students are both the customer and co-producer.

15. Students as a customers?
• Since student pay education costs; he
should be treated in the same way as
any other purchaser of goods or
services
• Students do not know what
combination of skills / knowledge will
best equip them for the world of work;
they may not appreciate the
importance of a subject until they are
in employment
• Students seek the easiest options and
courses with soft assessments;
conversely they may punish
academically demanding staff through
critical feedback
• Lectures are expected to entertain
rather than involving participation
• Students do not pay the full cost of their
education and they are not “purchasing” a
qualification per se
• Students adopt a consumerist perspective
and expect good grades, irrespective of
the amount of effort they have invested or
the quality of work produced
• Students transfer responsibility on to
teachers rather than taking responsibility
for their own learning. This results in a
reluctance to conduct independent study
and greater demands for all material to be
provided for students to learn as if
education can be simply passively
consumed

16. Insights..
• Student does not only consume the final
product (therefore, are customers), but
also participate in its production
(therefore, is co-producer or employee).
• The student may not be the product. The
real product is the learning of the students
and the consequent change in behavior.
• Learning as a team effort between
teacher and the student.
• Jointly, they produce a product that is
learning of the student. Both parties are
responsible participants in that process.

17. Insights gained..
• Total quality is about systemic change
.The "lead actor" in TQM is the process of
systemic change itself.
• The teaching process - proactive learning
methodology rather than reactive
teaching-based methodology.
• Principles of autonomous teams and
empowerment most useful to the
classroom situation.

18. Effective TQM implementation in
class requires
• Commitment demonstrated by examples not
gimmicks or slogans and teacher acting as
facilitator rather than controller.
• Information Technology as an enabler
• Satisfaction of students as the first priority
• Problem-solving approach through synergistic
teamwork and emphasis on process approach

19. Concluding remarks..
• Engineering students can be sensitized to ‘soft’
courses
• Outcome may not necessarily be a ‘grade’ to be
earned but many other intangible rewards (such
as going through the process, relating industry
experiences with academics, keeping touch with
faculty and enhancing quality of instructions).
• Technology as an enabler for class
management
• Translation of experiences to other courses as
well

20. Thanks due to…
• Prof V S Raju
• Prof Prem Vrat
• Prof Arun Kanda
• Prof D K Banwet
– Dr Arshinder Kaur
– Dr Vipul Jain
– Dr Jitesh Thakkar
– Mr Apratul Shukla
– Mr M K Bhatnagar, and
ETSC Staff
and YOU for
patient hearing You may contact me on :
sgdeshmukh2003@yahoo.co.in