Transcript Learning outcomes and introduction to assessment

Learning outcomes and
introduction to assessment
Pg Certificate in Higher Education Professional
Practice
Jannie Roed and Sue Moron-Garcia
6th May 2009
Session outline:







This session and your assignments
Learning outcomes – background and
basic principles
Writing learning outcomes
Activity I
Linking outcomes to assessment
Activity II
Summing up
This session and your assignment
Provide a lesson plan

Aims of the session

Learning Outcomes of the session

How the session is aligned with course
assessment
Learning outcomes –
the background
National Committee of
Inquiry into Higher
Education (Dearing
Report 1997)
Learning outcomes –
the background
Recommendations:







Staff training
Institute of Learning and Teaching (ILT)
Framework for Higher Education Qualifications
Benchmarking
Assurance of quality and standards
Development of programme specifications
Learning outcomes
Transparency
Transparency
Why learning outcomes?


Make it clear to
students what is
expected of them
Help staff focus on
what they want
students to achieve
What is a learning outcome?




May apply to a single teaching session, a module
or whole course.
It is a statement that predicts what learners will
have gained as a result of the learning process.
Describes the end of a process, not the process
itself.
It specifies the minimum achievement required at
the point of assessment in order that a student
may pass.
What follows from these
principles …

Learning outcomes are statements of essential
learning

Learning described in the learning outcome is
that which must be attained and demonstrated

Each learning outcome must be assessed

One mode of assessment may assess more than
one learning outcome

Each learning outcome must be passed
Writing learning outcomes.
Key principles:
Learning outcomes:

Should be written in a straightforward language

Should be achievable and restricted in numbers (4/5 per module)

Should have no references to process

Should not include verbs describing behaviour that cannot be
directly assessed – “appreciate”, “be familiar with”, “understand”

Must be measurable

Should follow Bloom’s Taxonomy (see handouts for verbs)
Writing learning outcomes

“At the end of the course, the student
is expected to be able to …”
Coventry
 “The intended learning outcomes are
that, on completion of this module,
students should be able to:”
Writing learning outcomes
Bloom’s Taxonomy
(1956)
Image from ATHERTON J S (2005) Learning
and Teaching: Bloom's taxonomy [Online] UK: Available:
http://www.learningandteaching.info/learn
ing/bloomtax.htm
Accessed: 25
September 2006
Writing learning outcomes
Active verb
Object
Qualifier
Summarise
the skills and
knowledge
necessary for
competent
advice giving
Design
clear learning
outcomes
for a Level 1
Chemistry
module
Assessment methods vs
assessment criteria


Assessment methods should be used in
module descriptors to show how each
learning outcome is assessed
Assessment criteria should not be
included
Activity I
10 minutes
In the context of your own subject, what
would constitute a level 1, level 2 and
level 3 outcome?
Coventry context



Programme specification template (based upon
QAA recommendations)
Programme outcomes depend upon module
outcomes (ideally!)
Documents are available on the Registry
website – or from the CSHE website
Why do we assess students?
Purpose of Assessment

Promote learning
- formative assessment
- summative assessment

Measure attainment of the intended learning
outcomes
Constructive alignment
Linking learning outcomes and assessments
John Biggs (1999) Teaching for Quality
Learning at University (SRHE & Open
University, Buckingham)
Source:
http://www.engsc.ac.uk/er/theory/constructive_alignment.asp
Activity II
10 minutes
How would you describe the constructive
alignment on the module you teach?
Is there anything you would like to
change?
Criticisms?
Learning outcomes

are unsophisticated (Hussey & Smith 2002)

serve new managerialism rather than students and staff (Hussey &
Smith 2002)

do not take disciplinary differences into account (Hussey & Smith
2002)

work against good educational practice (Entwistle et al. 2000)
References
Entwistle, N., Skinner, D., Entwistle, D. and Orr, S. (2000)
Conceptions and Beliefs about “Good Teaching”: An
Integration of Contrasting Research Areas”. Higher
Education Research and Development 19(1): 5-26.
Hussey, T. and Smith, P. (2002) The trouble with learning
outcomes. Active learning in higher education 3(3): 220233.