L1 1 3

=Learning objectives are linked explicitly to wider programme or institutional objectives.=

Evidence
Barrie (2007) discusses the general consensus that graduate attributes as well as discipline specific content and skills are desired by universities and employers alike. He provides evidence that academics hold very different conceptions of what such attributes are. If academics do not understand their institution’s espoused generic attributes, to represent relevant learning outcomes, then they will not be able to incorporate them in their teaching. It is striking in Barrie’s article that 15 different academics had six different conceptions of how students acquire graduate attributes. Unless consensus is achieved in what graduate attributes are and how they are acquired then there will be great difficulty designing course activities that will lead students to acquire the generic attributes that a higher learning institution seeks for its students. Barrie argues that generic attributes cannot be obtained solely by ‘bolt-on’ courses, but must be fostered from within discipline specific courses. Courses must be designed so that they enable students to learn ‘higher’ generic skills. However, stand alone ‘remedial’ or ‘bolt-on’ courses may have a role to play in preparing students to be able to learn graduate attributes.

Development of learning objectives helps instructors to clarify what they believe to be the key elements of the course they are teaching. Furthermore, students are more likely to take a deep approach to learning if they are intrinsically motivated. To be intrinsically motivated they need to see the relevance and importance of what they are being required to do. (Rust 2002, p. 150). Therefore, clear linkage of learning objectives to wider course, programme and institutional objectives is necessary.

At an overarching level most institutions have a set of graduate attributes, which are skills., personal and professional qualities that are deemed desirable in successful graduates. “The majority of Australian universities have engaged with the processes of graduate attribute development in recognition of their responsibility to equip graduates with the attributes needed for lifelong learning in a rapidly changing world and workplace” (Thompson et al. 2008).

Graduate attributes are defined by the Higher Education Council Australia (1992) report Achieving Quality as “the skills, personal attributes and values which should be acquired by all graduates, regardless of their discipline or field of study. In other words, they should represent the central achievements of higher education as a process” (p. 20). It is important for the learning objectives from individual courses to link to these graduate objectives to ensure that students completing programs can see a path leading from individual assessments to ultimate employability. An important function of learning objectives is to link the activities students undertake on a day to day basis with the institution-wide graduate attributes.

Gunn, Bell & Kafmann (2010) note that employability is something that a lot of institutions are concerned about for their graduates. Employability drives the setting of graduate attributes. To maximize the opportunities for their undergraduates, institutions need to coordinate at a strategic level and at a local disciplinary level. Some basic decisions at a strategic level are listed by Gunn et al., but importantly they note that decisions must also be made at the program design level about whether opportunities to develop graduate attributes are most effectively embedded in programs or where add-on courses would be helpful.

Resources
James et al. (2004) argue that even in the face of teacher resistance graduate attributes can be achieved and that in the process a community of practice through collaboration and sharing of teaching strategies can be achieved. James et al. argue for a bottom-up approach to working ‘through’ graduate attributes. The very existence of the idea of graduate attributes opens up a teaching space which ‘encourages, even demands, that our teaching practice be more than content transmission’ (p. 3). Teaching toward graduate attributes also encourages affective learning in addition to cognitive learning. James et al. have also identified good teaching practice across the University of Wollongong and interviewed those teachers. They have compiled a website listing about 30 strategies for teaching the nine graduate attributes. Linking the teaching of course content to the concept of graduate attributes has enabled an ‘institutionally sanctioned promotion of good teaching practice’ (p. 9).

Thompson et al. (2008) show how tutors can use the ‘ReView’ system to provide feedback to students that clusters assessment criteria into graduate attribute categories. This demonstrates to students what qualities, knowledge and skills are valued.

Learning objectives should be consistent with the goals of the curriculum, be clearly stated, clearly measurable, realistic and doable, appropriate for the level of the learner, and be focused on the significant aspects of the subject being studied.

Learning objectives should also be linked to more generic objectives (as an example: information literacy, see L6).

Kidney, Cummings & Boehm (2007) describe the quality assurance strategies in place for e-learning courses at the University of Houston-Clear Lake. Courses that made use of their eight QA strategies reported high student satisfaction, those that did not use all the strategies rated on average one or more standard deviations below the mean satisfaction. They note that often course design and instruction processes are so intense that those involved lose sight of the big picture. Periodic phases of reflection are necessary to combat this and ensure that linkages to institutional objectives and strategic plans are in place.