« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
USING LEARNING OUTCOMES
1 CONTEXT AND ISSUES
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Learning outcomes are extensively referred to in various Bologna-related documents, many of the official seminar reports and, more recently, the Berlin Communiqué itself:
Degree structure: 'Ministers encourage the member states to elaborate a framework of comparable and compatible qualifications for their higher education systems, which should seek to describe qualifications in terms of workload, level, learning outcomes, competences and profile. They also undertake to elaborate an overarching framework of qualifications for the European Higher Education Area.
Within such frameworks, degrees should have different defined outcomes. First and second cycle degrees should have different orientations and various profiles in order to accommodate a diversity of individual, academic and labour market needs. First cycle degrees should give access, in the sense of the Lisbon Recognition Convention, to second cycle programmes. Second cycle degrees should give access to doctoral studies.'1
Learning outcomes have achieved an exalted status bolstered by the ubiquitous number of references to them in conferences, official documents and communiqués. This is in stark contrast to the poor level of understanding associated with them and their relatively rare practical implementation across Europe. Detailed experience of learning outcomes is in fact limited to just a few countries at both the institutional and national levels. This gap presents a significant challenge to the Bologna process and even calls into doubt the full realisation of the European Higher Education Area by 2010. This makes the need for their better understanding a priority.
Learning outcomes represent one of the essential building blocks for transparent higher education systems and qualifications. They have a reputation as rather mundane and prosaic tools, yet it is this basic underpinning function that makes them so significant. It is important that there should be no confusions about their role, nature and significance, or the educational foundations of the Bologna process will be weakened. Learning outcomes have applications at three distinct levels: (i) the local level of the individual higher education institution (for course units/modules, programmes of study 2 and qualifications); (ii) the national level (for qualifications frameworks and quality assurance regimes); and (iii) internationally (for wider recognition and transparency purposes). Learning outcomes and 'outcomes-based approaches' have implications for curriculum design, teaching, learning and assessment, as well as quality assurance. They are likely to form an important part of twenty-first century approaches to higher education and the reconsideration of such vital questions as to what, who, how, where and when we teach and assess. The very nature and role of education is being questioned, now more than ever before, and learning outcomes are important tools in clarifying the results of learning for the student, citizen, employer and educator.
In terms of curriculum design and development, learning outcomes are at the forefront of educational change. They represent a change in emphasis from 'teaching' to 'learning' typified by what is know as the adoption of a student-centred approach in contrast to traditional teacher-centred viewpoint. Student-centred learning produces a focus on the teaching - learning - assessment relationship and the fundamental links between the design, delivery and measurement of learning.
Learning outcomes are not just an isolated tool at the level of curriculum design but also represent an approach that plays a significant role in a much wider context that includes: the integration of academic and vocational education and training (VET), the assessment of prior experiential learning (APEL) 3, the development of lifelong learning qualifications frameworks, the development of credit transfer and accumulation systems.
The origin of learning outcomes approaches have a chequered history and can be loosely traced to IV Pavlof (1849-1936) and his conditioning of dogs! Following this, the American 'behavioural school' of psychological thought developed with the work of JB Watson (1858-1958) and BF Skinner (1904-1990). The psychologists Watson and Skinner developed the behaviourist approach that explained human behaviour in terms of responses to external stimuli. Notwithstanding Skinner's ideas on mass conditioning, programmed instruction and the excesses of some of their crude approaches, their work led to productive research on the improvement of US teaching, learning and training methods in the areas of business, industry and the armed forces. Behaviourism emphasised the clear identification and measurement of learning and the need to produce observable and measurable outcomes. The 'learning outcomes approach' was subsequently further developed by educational authorities in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, United Kingdom and more recently by Denmark, Sweden, Ireland and other parts of Europe. From these beginnings the emphasis on learning outcomes has evolved to encompass all subject areas and has moved from the vocational education and training (VET) fields through to higher education.
This report seeks to explore the context and issues surrounding the role, nature and purposes of learning outcomes, including an evaluation of their positive and negative aspects and a consideration of alternative approaches to express, measure and evaluate learning (section 1). It provides a brief exploration of the current usage of learning outcomes across Europe and some consideration of global developments ( section 2). It analyses the role of learning outcomes in the Bologna process and seeks to assess their importance and implications for each of the 'action lines' and some of the key Bologna initiatives ( section 3). Finally, it identifies a number of issues for consideration, together with areas for further reflection and development ( section 4).
1.2 WHAT ARE LEARNING OUTCOMES - their definition, nature and potential
There is currently no precise agreement about, or definition of, the term 'learning outcome' across Europe or the rest of the globe. However, this does not necessarily signify a problem as most who use the term have taken it from Northern European, Australian, New Zealand, South African and US practice and the meaning has not fundamentally changed. Learning outcomes have been commonly defined as follows:
'A statement of what a learner is expected to know, understand and/or be able to demonstrate at the end of a period of learning.'4
'Learning outcomes (are) statements of what a learner is expected to know, understand and/or be able to demonstrate after a completion of a process of learning.'5
' Statements of what a learner can be expected to know, understand and/or do as a result of a learning experience.'6
' Student learning outcomes are properly defined in terms of knowledge, skills, and abilities that a student has attained at the end (or as a result) of his or her engagement in a particular set of higher education experiences.7
'Learning outcomes are statements that specify what a learner will know or be able to do as a result of a learning activity. Outcomes are usually expressed as knowledge, skills, or attitudes.'8
'Learning outcomes (are) specific measurable achievements.9
A learning outcome is a statement of what competences a student is expected to possess as a result of the learning process.10
'Learning outcome statements are content standards for the provincial education system. Learning outcomes are statements of what students are expected to know and to do at an indicated grade, they comprise the prescribed curriculum.'11
These definitions of learning outcomes do not differ significantly from each other. A learning outcome is a written statement of what the successful student/learner is expected to be able to do at the end of the module/course unit, or qualification. The key aspect each of the definitions has in common is the desire for more precision and consideration as to what exactly a learner acquires in terms of knowledge and/or skills when they successfully complete some learning. Learning outcomes are concerned with the achievements of the learner rather than the intentions of the teacher (expressed in the aims of a module or course). They can take many forms and can be broad or narrow in nature. There is often some confusion between learning outcomes and aims and objectives and certainly many regard learning outcomes and objectives as the same thing and use the terms synonymously. Aims are concerned with teaching and the teacher's intentions whilst learning outcomes are concerned with learning. 12 It has been remarked that
' There is no absolutely correct way of writing learning outcomes…' 13
The creation of learning outcomes is not a precise science and they require considerable thought to write - it is easy to get them wrong and create a learning strait jacket. Learning outcomes are commonly further divided into different categories of outcomes. The most common sub-divisions are between: subject specific outcomes that relate to the subject discipline and the knowledge and/or skills particular to it; and generic (sometimes called key transferable skills) outcomes that relate to any and all disciplines e.g. written, oral, problem-solving, information technology, and team working skills, etc. The identification of generic skills is seen as important in enhancing the employability of graduates whatever their discipline.
Learning outcome statements commonly begin with ' On completion of the learning (unit/module or qualification) the successful student will be able to assess the relative merits and implications of the adoption of learning outcomes.' Such statements are typically characterised by the use of active verbs. Six categories of learning were identified by Bloom as: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. 14 Examples of verbs used are as follows: for knowledge - duplicate, state, relate; for comprehension - classify, describe, recognise, review; for application - apply, demonstrate, solve; for analysis - calculate, analyse, appraise, criticise; for synthesis - assemble, construct, plan, formulate; for evaluation - appraise, argue, predict evaluate, etc. 15
It is important to recognise the broad connection between learning outcomes, levels, level descriptors, credits, and teaching, learning and assessment. Learning outcomes have been described as a basic educational building block and as such they have a direct and powerful links with a number of other educational tools. They make possible much more than the simple identification of learning achievements. They have a direct relationship to levels and level indicators. When learning outcomes are written they are created in the context of the institutional/national/international reference points that aid the maintenance of standards and quality ( see section 3.7). Therefore the development of the curricula in terms of learning outcomes does not happen in a vacuum. Appropriate reference points guide the module/unit and programme learning outcomes.
Credit-based systems are rapidly being introduced across Europe and some are intimately linked to learning outcomes. For example in the Scottish Credit and Qualification Framework (SCQF) two measures are used to place qualifications and learning programmes in their framework. These are the levels of the outcomes of learning and the volume of these outcomes described in terms of SCQF credit points. In this way SCQF credit points are used to quantify the outcomes of learning and give them a value or currency. 16
In the ECTS systems credits are inevitably 17 moving towards a definition in terms of 'notional learning time to achieve specified learning outcomes'. Credits are a powerful way to quantify learning achievement in different contexts (VET, lifelong learning as well as higher education). However, ECTS credits are not currently linked to levels and consequently they suffer from being rather crude instruments as they cannot delineate progression or indicate anything about the nature of learning. It is only when credits are linked to level and learning outcomes (learning outcomes are used to define credits) do they reach their full potential ( see sections 3.6 and 3.8).
Finally, learning outcomes cannot be divorced from teaching, learning and assessment. This is the most significant set of relationships for curriculum designers. Once the learning outcomes have been decided it is obviously good practice to decide suitable methods of assessing them and the production of relevant assessment criteria. The final stage in this process is to design the appropriate delivery mechanism - the teaching and learning methods to be used. This sequence for module/course development is not necessarily as rigid as described. The important point is that outcomes-learning-delivery-assessment enjoy a causal link and clear reflection on their relationship improves the coherence of course design.
The adoption of a learning outcomes approach represents more than simply expressing learning in terms of outcomes. It entails much more, due to their significant implications for all aspects of curriculum design, delivery, expression, assessment and standards.
1.3 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNING OUTCOMES AND COMPETENCES
The relationship between learning outcomes and competences is a complex area - the subject of some debate and no little confusion. 'Competence' and 'competences' are used in association with learning outcomes in a number of ways - hence the problem. 'Competence' can broadly refer to aptitude, proficiency, capability, skills and understanding, etc. A competent person is someone with sufficient skills and knowledge and capabilities. Some take a narrow view and equate competence just with skills acquired by training. It should be recognised that there is no precise common understanding or use of the term.
In the Tuning project competences and skills are understood as including 'knowing and understanding' (theoretical knowledge of an academic field, the capacity to know and understand), 'knowing how to act' (practical and operational application of knowledge to certain situations), 'knowing how to be' (values as an integral element of the way of perceiving and living with others and in a social context). Competences represent a combination of attributes (with respect to knowledge and its application, skills, responsibilities and attitudes) and are used to describe the level or extent to which a person is capable of performing them. In this context, a competence or a set of competences means that a person can demonstrate a certain capacity or skill and perform a task in a way that allows evaluation of the level of achievement. Competences can be demonstrated and therefore assessed. Both the Tuning project and the shared qualification descriptors (Dublin descriptors) that were developed within the Joint Quality Initiative (JQI), include generic competences (skills and knowledge) and include attributes like the capacity to learn, the capacity for analysis and syntheses etc. In relation to the Tuning project a list of 30 generic competences was identified.
Learning outcomes are commonly expressed in terms of competences or skills and competence. The loose use of all these terms in an almost interchangeable way does lead to confusion and the development of a common terminological understanding should be encouraged.
1.4 POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF LEARNING OUTCOMES
The introduction of learning outcomes is, and has always been, subject to much disagreement and has raised much passion in educationalists. It is clear that they can have both positive and negative consequences and the problems associated with their introduction should not be underestimated. The following is a brief review of the main issues that are normally raised, associated with the advantages and disadvantages of their introduction.
Those who have reservations about the adoption of learning outcomes approaches have expressed two main concerns: (i) basic conceptual/philosophical objections and (ii) practical/technical objections.
In terms of philosophy, the objections follow the view that higher education learning cannot be constricted and/or reduced to a series of learning outcomes that inhibit and prescribe the learning process. Academic study is by definition open-ended and the detailed specification of outcomes is antithetical to the traditional university function. Proponents of this view often emphasise the distinction between higher education and vocational education and training, the latter being more suited to a learning outcomes approach due to the skills and competence-based nature of such courses. Academic study, it is suggested, is different in nature and cannot be limited to a skill/competence-based approach that creates a target-led culture focused on ticking boxes. Learning outcomes are viewed as an attack on the liberal conception of education, which diminishes the teacher to facilitator and stifles the diversity of education by reducing it to a crass instrumentalist approach.
The practical/technical objections to learning outcomes are associated with their formulation and implementation. The implementation of learning outcomes is a formidable task that involves a huge staff-development process as well as cost implications in terms of time and money. It is a massive undertaking to transform all curricula to be expressed in terms of outcomes and this often takes years to accomplish. In addition, there can be a high degree of staff resentment and disagreement concerning the detailed process of identifying, writing and implementing learning outcomes - and the consequential changes to teaching, learning and assessment. Furthermore, various technical problems arise concerning the nature and detail of the approach to outcomes adopted. It is argued that learning outcomes written as threshold statements can limit learning and stifle creativity as well as dumb-down teaching. Learning outcomes can be over-described and under-described (too specific or too general). Their development requires the existence of some sort of framework of qualifications descriptors, levels and level descriptors within a qualifications framework. Finally, it is sometimes the case that the move to learning outcomes, which is often linked to the introduction of credits and modular frameworks, leads to module/unit overload as too much is crammed into a restricted time period for learning.
The advantages of adopting learning outcomes exist at several levels in terms of benefits for the: (i) course/module designer; (ii) quality assurance and standards; (iii) learners; and (iv) national and international educational transparency.
In terms of course and module design the use of explicit learning outcome statements can help ensure consistency of delivery across modules or programmes. They are also said to aid curriculum design by clarifying areas of overlap between module/programme/qualifications. Learning outcomes help course designers to determine precisely the key purposes of a course, how components of the syllabus fit and how learning progression is incorporated. Highlighting the crucial relationship between teaching, learning and assessment (criteria and grading) improves course design and the student experience. Learning outcomes promote reflection on assessment, and the development of assessment criteria and more effective and varied assessment.
The benefits to quality assurance relate to how learning outcomes increase transparency and the comparability of standards between and within qualifications. Outcomes-based qualifications posses greater credibility and utility than traditional qualifications. They play a key role (nationally and potentially internationally) by acting as points of reference for establishing and assessing standards.
Learners benefit from a comprehensive set of statements of exactly what they will be able to achieve after successful study. They provide learners with clear information that can help them with their choice of module/unit/programme/qualification to study and can lead to more effective learning. They also benefit employers, higher education institutions and civil society in general by clearly articulating the achievement and attributes associated with particular qualifications.
Internationally, learning outcomes contribute to the mobility of students by facilitating the recognition of their qualifications and improving the transparency of qualifications and thus simplifying credit transfer. They also provide a common format for different forms of delivery (e.g. distance, work-based, non-formal and experiential learning 18) and have significant capacity to link vocational educational and training and higher education. This is important when there are now an increasing number of national and international initiatives to promote lifelong learning ( see section 3.6). Learning outcomes can assist the creation of multiple progression routes through and between different the educational systems.
It must be stressed that the positive and negative aspects above are a summary representation of the general claims that are made about learning outcomes. In practice, many of the objections can be overcome, providing that learning outcomes are developed with care and sensitivity. Much depends on how they are constructed and whether (and how) they include knowledge, skills, abilities/attitudes and understanding. Badly constructed, narrow and limiting learning outcomes are not appropriate for higher education where creativity and imaginative leaps are highly valued.
1.5 ALTERNATIVES TO THE USE OF LEARNING OUTCOMES
The majority of European educational systems do not use learning outcomes in any systematic and comprehensive way to express the purposes, content, nature and level of their qualifications (the curricula). It is therefore useful to explore what alternative techniques and approaches systems employ for expressing their studies.
Those countries that do not use learning outcomes rely on traditional approaches for the explanation and expression of their qualifications and the units/modules that constitute them. The curricula are described in terms of what students will cover. The content is listed and the main theories, events, processes and relationships are mapped-out. This type of approach can be characterised as part of an 'input-focused' series of measures to express the general level and relationship between qualifications. 19 This approach emphasises the length of a programme, its access requirements, the material covered, and the number of staff and level of resources available.
These variables are often used as the focus for quality assurance activities in input-driven systems. In addition, learning is categorised in terms of years of study to achieve a particular qualification. In this case it is generally understood that a first year of 'first cycle' study is less complex and demanding than a fourth year of study. So a reference to how many years a qualification might take, plus a specific year of study, provides some very general information about the level of study. This approach is often accompanied by an emphasis on student workload measured in terms of direct contact time with staff 20. However, total student workload expressed in hours is now, due to the Bologna process, assuming more weight in Europe. 21 This tendency will become strengthened as the move from a curriculum model based on the volume of learning identified in terms of years of study shifts to one based on the notional time to achieve specific learning outcomes. 22 However, the latter will not eradicate the former completely, as the length of a traditional programme is a sort of 'gold standard' we are all familiar with. However, the adoption of learning outcomes approaches will mean that less emphasis will be put on crude time measures and greater focus will be applied to flexible delivery modes that are becoming increasingly more popular. Part time learning, distance learning (including e-learning), work-based learning, burst-mode learning and intensive programmes increasingly do not conform to the time-pattern of traditional education.
The input-focused approach has implications for curriculum design. It is common for staff in HEIs to first decide the course content, working from a traditional syllabus, and then let this dictate how it will be taught and assessed. This teacher-centred approach stands in opposition to the output-focused learning outcomes approach. Indeed, there is evidence that these input-focused approaches are slowly giving way to more output-focused, student-centred approaches that use 'notional learning time to achieve given learning outcomes'. The problem is that although the logic of such an approach is slowly being acknowledged (Tuning, ECTS), most European HEIs currently do not systematically express their programmes in terms of learning outcomes.
The outcomes-based approach to course design has assumed more importance as the nature of the educational environment has changed in the last 10 years. The patterns of education are now different, there are more part-time students and lifelong learning is deemed essential to a vibrant economy. With the advent of credit systems, the need to widen access and ensure a 'Europe of knowledge' is created - challenging our traditional models and modes of education.
1.6 LEARNING OUTCOMES AND EDUCATIONAL REFORM - PEDAOGY, ASSESSMENT AND QUALITY ASSURANCE
Learning outcomes focus attention on explicit and detailed statements of what students learn - the skills, understanding and abilities we seek to develop and then test. It is important to stress that learning outcomes form an integral part of an educational reform agenda that can be summarised in the phrase 'student-centred learning'. This approach in its extreme manifestation has been represented as a paradigm shift from traditional ways to measure and express learning characterised as 'input' approaches (that emphasises teaching hours and resource counting) to 'output'-focused techniques (using learning outcomes and competences). The emphasis moves from the content (what staff teach) to outcome (what a student will be able to do). However, the move towards student-centred learning is not new and many educators have instinctively adhered to such an approach. The extreme choice between input, and output-focused approaches to teaching and learning misrepresents the situation where a middle way is often possible and constructive.
The adoption of a learning outcomes approach focuses activity on the learner and away from the teacher. It promotes the idea of the teacher as a facilitator or manager of the learning process and recognises that much learning takes place outside the classroom without a teacher present. 23 It further involves the idea that students should be actively involved in the planning and management of their own learning and take more responsibility for this as the student progressively develops as an independent learner. 24 It is important to note that student-centred learning necessitates the use of learning outcomes as the only logical approach. This produces an automatic focus on how learners learn and the design of effective learning environments. There is a cascade effect that links the learning outcomes, the selection of appropriate teaching strategies and the development of suitable assessment techniques. This is done within the context of external reference points (qualification descriptors, level descriptors, benchmark statements). Modules are not developed in a vacuum but within a dynamic and interactive set of factors that directly link the internal, institutional world, with the external national qualifications framework and quality assurance system.
« Previous | Contents | Next »