L1 1 5

=Course workload expectations and assessment tasks are consistent with course learning objectives.=

Evidence
Learning objectives define what it is teachers want students to be able to do by the end of a course. In order that they have a realistic chance of achieving these objectives then students’ expected workload must be reasonable. There is often tension between what teachers expect of students and what students actually do (Kolari et al. 2006, 2008, Zuriff 2003). However this may be because students don’t know what to do (Chambers 1992, Thomas et al. 1991). Precise course objectives and assessments that respect those objectives ought to aid the students.

It is also established that there is a correlation between an overly burdensome workload and a surface approach to learning (Chambers 1992, Kreber 2003). If a deep learning outcome is desired then students must not perceive their workload as too heavy. If learning objectives are to support student outcomes beyond the recall of information then perceptions of workload must be kept within acceptable limits.

Importantly, the demographics of students attending higher learning institutions is changing and more students are engaging in higher learning with less preparation than in the past. This coupled with new pedagogies means that instructors must continually attend to student workload. If students are already studying for the right number of hours (Marshall 2010), then focus must be on the efficiency of this work. Learning objectives must be designed with workload expectations in mind, and student workload must be monitored to ensure it is consistent with that envisioned by instructors.

Ellis et al. (2009) studied what it is that students perceive as most relevant in terms of e-learning. They also note correlations between e-learning approaches and outcome variables. ‘Significant strong correlations were found between the deep approaches, the e-learning variables, perceptions of the quality of e-learning, and achievement. We interpret these results as evidence for the careful structuring and design of e-learning activities and resources’ (p. 316). They further note that in order to enhance the e-learning experience we must illustrate the value of various activities. ‘Some awareness-raising about the nature and purpose of submissions and online feedback would be a useful teaching strategy if we wish to improve the quality of e-learning’ (p. 316). Students need to be guided through the e-learning activities. Sometimes there is resistance to participation or a low perception of the value of contributions by staff and students because the learners don’t understand the link between objectives and activities.

Resources
Chambers (1992) describes how to assess a course for workload and includes a worked example of a course for which the expected workload is too great when compared to the institutional guidelines.

It is important that whatever form the assessment takes, the evaluation should measure the student’s accomplishment of the learning objectives. Students’ number one complaint when they perceive workload as too high is that assessments are all due around the same time (Giles 2007, 2009). This needs to be avoided. But also, assessments should be relevant to the course objectives. The wording of the objective ought to determine what the assessment will be.