EMM v2.3 L1

'''L1. Learning objectives guide the design and implementation of courses'''

Background
Learning outcomes are results of learning that mainly derive from educational intentions or learning objectives, which clearly describe the learning content, the actions to be taken or performed, and how these will be assessed (Laurillard, 2002). Quality learning objectives clearly and explicitly specify both pedagogical approach and content, are accompanied by a flexible and responsive teaching attitude to diverse learning processes and styles, and assess authentic practice, which engages learner ownership (Harden, 2002; Mager, 1984). High-quality learning outcome achievement accompanies a more transferable and higher level of understanding of a subject (Prosser and Trigwell, 1999).

Good documentation of learning objectives is explicit about pedagogical strategies, ideals, and values, looks for learning processes rather than testing for content knowledge, accepts interdisciplinary work and diverse outcomes, and considers team as well as individual achievement (Salmon, 2000). Clear, explicit specification of personal, transferable subject outcomes is commensurate with quality of learning experience and learner success (Allan, 1996). Wiggins & McTighe (2005) emphasize the importance of backwards design. This is where one first determines what students need to know, understand and be able to do, taking into consideration Goals, Graduate attributes and Teacher/student interests. Then determine acceptable evidence that this has been learned considering a range of assessment methods. Finally, learning experiences can be planned, activities, materials and resources needed in order that students can attain the skills to be demonstrated.

The writing of learning outcomes must relate generically and specifically to the level of the programme or course, and achievement is assessed to be either complete, or not, but grades may provide feedback on the quality of work. Outcome statements constitute an active verb and its object in a contextual or conditional phrase and describe either declarative knowledge, or performative skill/knowledge synthesis capability, which are categorised as ‘knowledge and understanding’ or ‘skills and other attributes’ (Holmes, 2004, p. 14). Finally, detailed planning for learning outcomes can benefit from revisions of Bloom’s (1956) cognitive taxonomy that afford access to more current, complex and complete knowledge of learning processes (Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., & Bloom, B. S., 2001; Dettmer, 2006; Tomei, 2005), and also from consideration of Biggs' SOLO Taxonomy (Biggs, 1999) and its focus on building student capability.

Related Standards and Guidelines
This process is informed by: Quality On the Line (Merisotis, J. P., & Phipps, R. A., 2000) course development benchmark set; Queensland University of Technology teaching capabilities framework (2004/2005); Canadian Recommended E-learning Guidelines (Barker, K., 2002); Balancing quality and access: Principles of good practice for electronically offered academic degree and certificate programs (Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications, 2003) and; ADEC guiding principles for distance learning (American Distance Education Consortium, 2002).