Learning outcomes and introduction to assessment

1. Learning outcomes and introduction to assessment Pg Certificate in Higher Education Professional Practice Jannie Roed and Sue Moron-Garcia 6th May 2009

2. 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

3. 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

4. Learning outcomes – the background National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education (Dearing Report 1997)

5. 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

6. Why learning outcomes? • Make it clear to students what is expected of them • Help staff focus on what they want students to achieve

7. 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.

8. 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

9. 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)

10. 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:”

11. Writing learning outcomes Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) Image from ATHERTON J S (2005) Learning and Teaching:  Bloom's taxonomy   [On-line] UK: Available: http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/bloomtax.htm Accessed: 25September 2006

12. Writing learning outcomes

13. 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

14. Activity I 10 minutes In the context of your own subject, what would constitute a level 1, level 2 and level 3 outcome?

15. 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

16. Why do we assess students?

17. Purpose of Assessment • Promote learning - formative assessment - summative assessment • Measure attainment of the intended learning outcomes

18. Constructive alignment Linking learning outcomes and assessments John Biggs (1999) Teaching for Quality Learning at University (SRHE & Open University, Buckingham)

19. Source: http://www.engsc.ac.uk/er/theory/constructive_alignment.asp

20. Activity II 10 minutes How would you describe the constructive alignment on the module you teach? Is there anything you would like to change?

21. 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)

22. 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): 220-233.