Learning Outcomes
Learning outcomes are central to the teaching and learning process
(Biggs, 1999; Fink, 2003). Developing learning outcomes is the first
critical step in course planning as they set the direction for the
entire learning process. They frame the content to be learned and guide
appropriate assessments of learning. Learning outcomes inform students
of intentions and direct student study efforts. Finally they help both
instructors and their students monitor their progress (Ambrose, Bridges,
DiPietro, Lovett, & Norman, 2010).
A Note about Interrelated and Confusing Terms: Learning Outcomes and Learning Objectives
Learning outcomes are the big picture, often complex goals that
instructors expect students to achieve or learn by the end of the
course. They should be stated in terms of student performance, not what
the instructor hopes to achieve, such as what content will be covered.
Learning outcomes are also called instructional goals (Diamond, 2008;
Nilson, 2003).
Learning objectives are smaller units of learning that
flow directly from the learning outcomes. While a course may have about
five larger learning outcomes, each learning outcome may have a few
learning objectives associated with it. For example, learning
objectives may describe what students will learn from the discussion in a
specific class. The literature often interchanges learning outcomes and
learning objectives. In this book, I am referring to the larger
learning outcomes.
During the last half of the twentieth century educators developed
objectives using Benjamin Bloom's taxonomy to describe learning
experiences (Bloom, 1956). This taxonomy reflects the behaviorist
psychological theories of learning that were accepted in the 1950s and
1960s and identified a hierarchy of levels of cognitive learning from
recall to evaluate. Objectives could also be in the psychomotor or
affective domain. Courses often had such a long list of behavioral
objectives that faculty became frustrated and limited their teaching
innovations (Diamond, 2008). With the move towards more accountability
and the focus on learning as opposed to teaching, educators are now
using learning outcomes.
You have various learning taxonomies to choose from when developing
learning outcomes. Some of Bloom's original team, along with other
scholars (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001), modified Bloom's taxonomy to
be more consistent with current theories of learning and consider a
hierarchy of types of cognitive processes (similar to the verbs used in
Bloom's taxonomy) required to learn and four nonhierarchical types of
knowledge: factual, conceptual, procedural and metacognitive. L. Dee
Fink (2003) offers very different taxonomy of learning by identifying
six types of learning: fundamental knowledge, application, integration,
human dimension, caring, and learning how to learn. Choose the learning
taxonomy that best suits your learning goals.
Teaching/Learning Methods
I call this element of this aspect teaching/learning methods because I
see them combined into one process with a learning-centered approach.
Learning is now an integral part of the teaching process. Instead of
only lecturing to students, instructors now engage students in many
different active learning activities, including role playing,
simulations, debates, case studies, small group learning, and
problem-based learning (Fink, 2003). Learners need to interpret content
in ways that make it meaningful to them, not just hear or read it.
Teaching/learning methods can also occur out of the classroom as
assignments or in online learning.
Active learning methods that foster deep and intentional learning
often involve interactions with others. In these situations, students
take control of their own learning. Active learning through discussing
the content or solving problems in small groups leads to better
long-term retention and the ability to use the material in new
situations in the future. When students articulate their ideas to their
peers, hear what others have to say about these ideas, and collaborate
on an instructional task, their conceptual learning improves (Bransford,
Brown, & Cocking, 2000; Fox & Hackerman, 2003; Kuh, Kinzie,
Schuh, & Whitt, 2005; McKeachie, 2007; Resnick, 1991).
Most concepts and tasks in higher education are complex, involving
different component skills, cognitive processes, and many different
facts. To help students learn, instructors need to break down these
complex concepts or tasks into their component parts, provide students
opportunities to perform these skills or cognitive processes separately,
and then allow them to practice the integrated tasks before assessing
them. Instructors can point out the key aspects of the task so students
know where to concentrate their efforts (Ambrose et al., 2010). Reading
the educational literature on this topic can be useful as others may
have conducted research on how to teach this concept.
Sometimes
instructors have trouble seeing these components as distinct because
they appear so integrated. An advanced student or teaching assistant
can help unpack these components. When students engage in authentic
learning, defined as solving real-world problems, they become more
motivated to learn deeply and with intention. Often students work
collaboratively and use technology as they carry out these tasks.
Authentic learning promotes the development of critical thinking and
the ability to organize and use information and creativity (Doyle,
2011).
Acquisition of Knowledge, Skills, and Values
The contemporary view of learning is defined as knowledge
construction. Psychological research shows that the most effective
learning occurs when students build their own associations between new
information and their previous knowledge base, not when they memorize
how others have framed it (Alexander & Murphy, 1998; Mayer, 1998).
An individual's prior knowledge about a topic influences what and how
he or she learns new material; it can help or hinder new learning.
Students' prior knowledge may include appropriate and inappropriate
conceptions or beliefs. Effective teachers find out if their students
have incorrect prior knowledge, such as misconceptions or stereotypes,
by assessing students; understanding when they begin the course or unit.
Instructors address any erroneous knowledge by challenging the
misconceptions directly. This is especially important in the physical,
biological, and social sciences. Experiences with previous students and
the literature in the field further identify common misconceptions and
stereotypes (Ambrose et al., 2010; Fox & Hackerman, 2003).
Motivational theory and cognitive psychology describe conditions that
foster this acquisition of knowledge, skills, and values. The
relationship between the difficulty of a course and student learning is
curvilinear. The best learning occurs when the course is perceived as
difficult enough to be challenging, but still seen as achievable. Under
these circumstances, students are motivated to try.
If a course is too
easy, students do not put forth any effort. If the course is perceived
as too difficult, students are not motivated to try because they think
there is no way they will succeed (McKeachie, 2007). After three decades
of research on college students, Ernest Pascarella and Patrick
Terenzini (2005) conclude that the student's amount of effort and level
of involvement is one of the best predictors of the impact of higher
education on him or her. The more involved and engaged students are
with their educational program, the more they will be influenced by
their college experience.
Problem Solving and Critical Thinking
Employers and society in general expect college graduates to be able
to apply the facts for critical thinking and problem solving. These
skills are almost universally required in all careers today (Jones,
2005).
Problem solving depends on in-depth knowledge of the discipline and
the context. Apt problem solvers generate detailed and correct
representations and individualized contexts for problems that accurately
represent the dilemma.
These representations and contexts are highly
specific according to the organizing structures of that discipline.
Good problem solvers employ discipline-specific procedural skills
(Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000; Wittrock, 1998). For example,
graduate students in chemistry can solve chemical problems, but their
education does not increase their ability to solve problems in other
disciplines.
Effective problem solving draws on different processes: selecting the
appropriate strategy, applying this strategy to solve the particular
problem, and monitoring the success of that strategy. All of these
processes are essential to successful problem solving. The task is to
give students opportunities to learn and practice different strategies
in different types of situations. Good problem solvers try another
strategy when they find that the initial tactic did not work; weaker
problem solvers continue to apply the same approach even if it is not
working (National Research Council, 2001).
