Effective student learning outcomes do not exist in a vacuum. They are not mere declarations of
intent, but they determine the structure of the course. This involves a three-step process,
responding to the questions:
1. What do you want your students to get out of the course?
2. How do you assess whether they got it?
3. What do you have them do (in class and at home) so that they will get it?
Each answer to one of these three questions can change the answers to the other two questions.
In other words, the process is cyclical. Instructors start by developing what appear to be
meaningful learning outcomes. Then they look for effective ways to assess achievement of those
outcomes. In the process, they might find that no good methods exist for assessing the outcomes
the way they were originally phrased (e.g., they might have been too general, vague, ambitious,
etc.). Therefore, the available assessment design might lead to a revision of the original
outcomes.
Finally, as the instructor searches for appropriate course assignments and classroom
activities to prepare students for the assessment, other assessment activities might become
visible, or other outcomes might become desirable.
Making sure that there is a good “fit” between intended learning outcomes, assessment formats,
and class activities/assignments is a matter of “curricular alignment.” Unless all three elements
are properly aligned—outcomes, assessment, instructional format—the intended student learning
outcomes, very likely, are never achieved.
That’s why the development of learning outcomes alone is insufficient, unless they are
accompanied by a course design guaranteeing that these outcomes are systematically reinforced
at all levels of the course.
intent, but they determine the structure of the course. This involves a three-step process,
responding to the questions:
1. What do you want your students to get out of the course?
2. How do you assess whether they got it?
3. What do you have them do (in class and at home) so that they will get it?
Each answer to one of these three questions can change the answers to the other two questions.
In other words, the process is cyclical. Instructors start by developing what appear to be
meaningful learning outcomes. Then they look for effective ways to assess achievement of those
outcomes. In the process, they might find that no good methods exist for assessing the outcomes
the way they were originally phrased (e.g., they might have been too general, vague, ambitious,
etc.). Therefore, the available assessment design might lead to a revision of the original
outcomes.
Finally, as the instructor searches for appropriate course assignments and classroom
activities to prepare students for the assessment, other assessment activities might become
visible, or other outcomes might become desirable.
Making sure that there is a good “fit” between intended learning outcomes, assessment formats,
and class activities/assignments is a matter of “curricular alignment.” Unless all three elements
are properly aligned—outcomes, assessment, instructional format—the intended student learning
outcomes, very likely, are never achieved.
That’s why the development of learning outcomes alone is insufficient, unless they are
accompanied by a course design guaranteeing that these outcomes are systematically reinforced
at all levels of the course.
No comments:
Post a Comment