Workshop 1 Writing Learning Outcomes


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Workshop 1 Writing Learning Outcomes

  1. 1. Workshop 1 Writing Learning Outcomes Training Seminar Bologna Experts Madrid June 30th - July 1st 2008
  2. 2. Introductory Questions <ul><li>Do we need this workshop? </li></ul><ul><li>Why can´t we write learning outcomes right away? </li></ul><ul><li>What is really different? </li></ul><ul><li>Just rhetorics – or? </li></ul><ul><li>Who are we in here? Let´s introduce ourselves </li></ul><ul><li>Why do we meet? What are our expectations? </li></ul><ul><li>Is the objective of the session suitable, acceptable, feasible, sustainable? </li></ul>
  3. 3. Introductory Questions <ul><li>What kind of material could help? </li></ul><ul><li>Would a case study help at this time? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Which information do we require about a case? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Possible Examples </li></ul><ul><ul><li>National Framework </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sectoral Framework </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Institutional Framework </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Module description </li></ul></ul>
  4. 4. Session 1 From the identification of social and employability needs to profile definitions
  5. 5. Why to start and how to start an academic programme?
  6. 6. <ul><ul><li>Tuning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Profile (of a degree programme) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Developed from awareness of social needs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Outcomes of consultation process of stakeholders </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Diversity based on institutional strengths </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>In dialogue with European reference points </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Described in competences and learning outcomes </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. The Strategic Position Europeanisation (Internationalisation) of curriculum The Environment Bologna Declaration EU + 46 Countries Expectations and Purposes Stakeholders: Action Lines Do it right first time Resources and competences European diversity of Structures, processes, Outcomes EU-Programmes… Strategic Choices Implementation
  8. 8. The Environment <ul><ul><ul><li>Macro- </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Environment: PESTEL </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Industry: Porter´s Five Forces </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Markets: geographic / product </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>HE institution: SWOT </li></ul></ul></ul>
  9. 9. PESTEL <ul><li>Political governments withdraw </li></ul><ul><li>Economic globalisation – skill shortage </li></ul><ul><li>Social LLL – continuous updating </li></ul><ul><li>Technological job enrichment, new jobs (cutting across) </li></ul><ul><li>Ecological awareness – new industries </li></ul><ul><li>Legal federalism – fragmentation? </li></ul>
  10. 10. Porter´s Five Forces <ul><li>Industry: education and training </li></ul>Competitors HE institutions Apprenticeships Foreign HEI Suppliers Formal Informal non-formal education Buyers Industry Higher education Substitutes Corporate universities Barriers to entry Legal permission Accreditation
  11. 11. Markets <ul><li>In geographic terms </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>DAAD </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Brasilia, Jordan, Mexico, Namibia, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, Turkey, Vietnam </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>What does this mean? </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>EU </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Through their programmes – not only of the General Directorate Education and Culture: the world </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>In product terms </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Bologna </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Overarching European Qualification Framework </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>National Frameworks </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Third countries (Asia, South America, Australia, Africa…) </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Individual Institution </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Their interpretation of the Qualification Framework / Profile </li></ul></ul></ul></ul>
  12. 12. Ressources and Competences <ul><li>Bologna, </li></ul><ul><li>a unique selling point? </li></ul>
  13. 13. SWOT <ul><li>European higher education institutions: </li></ul><ul><li>Strengths </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Grants, living costs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Variety of cultures…. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Weaknesses </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Not one language (EAIE experience) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No transparency </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Seen in the light of the analyses of the environment, expectations and purposes </li></ul><ul><li>to arrive at </li></ul><ul><li>Opportunities and Threats </li></ul>
  14. 14. Critical Success Factors <ul><li>Unique resources? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>European diversity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>European QA </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>European QFW </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Core competences? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mobility </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Joint development of curricula </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Academic recognition </li></ul></ul>Bologna Declaration Brugges / Copenhagen Process ECTS/ ECVET Diploma Supplement Information Packages Learning Agreements
  15. 15. Strategic Choices Strategic Choices Institutional level Departmental level Development- Directions and Methods The strategtic position Implementation
  16. 16. Why / When should consultation of stakeholders take place?
  17. 17. Ideas <ul><li>Scenario technique might help: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Highest impact - most unlikely </li></ul></ul>
  18. 18. Scenario <ul><li>Highest impact </li></ul><ul><ul><li>EHEA </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Quality Assurance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Qualification Framework </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Academic Recognition </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Credits </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>LLL </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Governance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Market </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>WTO – education is a public good? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Education and training merge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Australia / US will penetrate the European market </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Increasing concentration of suppliers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Increasing power of HE institutions of various type </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Substitutes: corporate universities </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The growth of education and training in developing market (Africa, Asia -----see DAAD) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Beginning of mergers and acquisitions, not just strategic alliances across countries, leading to more rapid concentration in the industry of education and training </li></ul></ul>
  19. 19. Scenario <ul><li>Scenario 1: Benign </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Education is a public good </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Education and training merge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Australia and US will not penetrate the EU </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Corporate universities will not be able to substitute </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Growth of education and training in developing areas </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No increase in concentration </li></ul></ul>
  20. 20. Scenario <ul><li>Scenario 2: Hostile </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Education is a market good / service </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Education and training do not merge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Australia and US will penetrate the EU </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Corporate universities will be able to substitute </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No growth of education and training in developing areas </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Increase in concentration </li></ul></ul>
  21. 21. Scenario <ul><li>Scenario 3:„Industry wisdom“ </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Education is a market good / service </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Education and training merge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Australia and US will not penetrate the EU </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Corporate universities will not be able to substitute </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Growth of education and training in developing areas </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No increase in concentration but in cooperation (platform, hub-and-spoke, one-stop-shop) </li></ul></ul>
  22. 22. Consequences: Example cooperation <ul><li>Types </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Partnerships </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Networks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Joint ventures </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Strategic alliances </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Franchising </li></ul></ul>
  23. 23. Consequences: Example cooperation <ul><ul><li>Forms of cooperation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Strategic Alliances </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>„ Dual“ Study-Programmes </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Models for Curricula design </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Platform </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Hub-and-spoke </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>One-stop-shop </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Screwdriver institution </li></ul></ul></ul>
  24. 24. Common Platform – plus customised modules = individual study-programmes
  25. 25. One-stop-shop FH OS Regional E&T Center Uni OS BA Lingen Bereich Nordhorn Bereich Bramsche Bereich Quakenbrück Bereich Melle
  26. 26. HUB LH HUB UA Atlantik Hub-and-Spoke Code Sharing Berlin FMO Düsseldorf Hannover LA New York Dallas Spokes Spokes Spokes Spokes
  27. 27. Consequences: Example cooperation <ul><li>WTO </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Dumping </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Local content </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Rule of origin </li></ul></ul>
  28. 28. Consequences: Examples of concentration <ul><li>Mergers (floated on the Stock Exchange, Humboldt Berkeley University) </li></ul><ul><li>Acquisitions (floated, Chelsea Abramovitch University) </li></ul><ul><li>Corporate Universities (floated, Microsoft Intel Google University) ….. </li></ul><ul><li>The issue: Shareholder value </li></ul>
  29. 29. Which methods of consultation might be applied?
  30. 30. <ul><li>Regular platform </li></ul><ul><li>Questionnaire </li></ul><ul><li>Events </li></ul><ul><li>Teaching </li></ul><ul><li>Projects </li></ul><ul><li>Dissertations….. </li></ul>Examples
  31. 31. How to choose the relevant stakeholders and about which issues should consultation take place?
  32. 32. Expectations and Purposes <ul><li>Stakeholders / Tool: Stakeholder mapping </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Students </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Parents </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Economy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Society </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Enterprises </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Government </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Teachers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The institution </li></ul></ul>
  33. 33. Stakeholder Mapping Teachers Friends Low Society Parents Enterprises High Low High Impact / Power
  34. 34. Exercise: Prepare a profile (Each of you) <ul><li>Write a short profile of one of the bachelor study programme in which you are involved: pp 135-139 </li></ul>
  35. 35. Group reflection
  36. 36. Session 2 From profile description to identification of critical competences and learning outcomes for the degree programme
  37. 37. Which methods can be applied to select the main generic and subject specific competences?
  38. 38. When of relevance, to what extent should particular professions play a role in this selection process?
  39. 39. Who should play a role in the selection of key competences? What should be their role?
  40. 40. How can progression of learning outcomes be secured regarding the competence development of students in degree design?
  41. 41. Exercise: Prepare a set of learning outcomes <ul><li>LO can be written for a study-programme as well as for individual modules or course units </li></ul><ul><li>pp154-155 </li></ul><ul><li>pp147-159 </li></ul>
  42. 42. Group reflection
  43. 43. Workshop 2 Using Learning Outcomes Training Seminar Bologna Experts Madrid June 30th - July 1st 2008
  44. 44. Session 3 From learning outcomes to a suitable structure and a fair workload weight of the degree programme units
  45. 45. Which methods can be applied to programme the learning units ?
  46. 46. If thought useful, how to decide on a modular structure ?
  47. 47. Module <ul><li>Definition </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A module is a self-contained, formally structured learning experience with a coherent and explicit set of learning outcomes and assessment criteria. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Require </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Define learning outcomes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Allocate credits </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Facilitate </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Design of individual study-programmes (profiles) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>modularisation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Different routes to identifiable degrees, certificates, profiles etc. </li></ul></ul>
  48. 48. ECTS Good Practice to the advantage of LLL <ul><ul><li>Modules are not a prerequisite for the introduction of ECTS but they facilitate it. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A module carries credit as a whole. It is not possible to achieve credits for parts of a module. </li></ul></ul>
  49. 49. Good Practice <ul><li>It is advisable that </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>a module lasts for a specified period of time </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>preferably for no longer than one semester </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>A module should neither be too small nor too large </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>It is suggested that a module should not carry less than 5credits. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>It is also proposed that a module should carry 5 or a multiple of 5 credits. </li></ul></ul></ul>
  50. 50. Which methods can be applied to decide on the appropriate weight of ECTS credits ?
  51. 51. <ul><li>Student-centred system </li></ul><ul><li>Based on workload required to achieve learning outcomes </li></ul><ul><li>“ Convention” that 60 credits represents an annual workload of a full-time student </li></ul><ul><li>Allocated to all aspects of study programme </li></ul><ul><li>Based on completion + assessment </li></ul><ul><li>Respects the Learning Agreement between student and institutions (transfer + accumulation) </li></ul>ECTS - Key Features
  52. 52. ECTS – Key Features <ul><li>About 40 weeks of full-time learning </li></ul><ul><li>Workload of 1,500 – 1,800 hrs per year </li></ul><ul><li>Normally 1 credit equals 25-30 hours </li></ul><ul><li>Time to be invested by the learner to achieve the learning outcomes, including independent studies </li></ul><ul><li>Credits are allocated in such a way that the first academic degree can be obtained on the basis of 180-240 credits predetermined in a respective study-programme </li></ul><ul><li>This has to be stated in the ECTS documents </li></ul>
  53. 53. ECTS and Qualifications Framework <ul><li>By the „ percentage“, „analytical“ or „determination“ method and by formative evaluation . A requirement is to know the profile of the learner or have at least an idea about him or her. </li></ul>
  54. 54. Which leading criteria should play a role in the credit allocation ?
  55. 55. Terminology <ul><li>Workload </li></ul><ul><li>A quantitative measure of all learning activities that may be feasibly required for the achievement of the learning outcomes </li></ul><ul><li>Credit </li></ul><ul><li>A quantified means of expressing the volume of learning based on the achievement of learning outcomes and their associated workload </li></ul>
  56. 56. Workload in detail <ul><li>In ECTS the workload comprises the time spent for lectures, seminars, self-directed studies, preparation for and participation in examinations, etc. with the objective to learn </li></ul>
  57. 57. ECTS - Links <ul><li>Workload = Learning </li></ul><ul><li>Learning assessed = Credits </li></ul><ul><li>Requirement = Learning has to be assessed this must be possible) </li></ul><ul><li>„ Assessability“ = by defining the learning outcomes </li></ul><ul><li>Need = adequate method of assessment </li></ul>
  58. 58. Exercise: Outline of a degree programme <ul><li>Prepare an outline of a degree programme in terms of units/modules with their appropriate weight of ECTS credits </li></ul><ul><ul><li>One for the degree programme Chapter 2 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Should be developed with the LO to be achieved and the competences to be developed in mind. It should contain possible course unit titles and/or topics to cover. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>One in which the units are related to the competences to develop Chapter 42 pp 88 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Identify the competences to be developed for one course unit and write the set of related LO </li></ul></ul></ul>
  59. 59. Group reflection
  60. 60. Session 4 From learning outcomes to best strategies for teaching, learning and assessment
  61. 61. In how far does the new paradigm of student centred learning have an impact on the teaching, learning and assessment approaches to be applied?
  62. 62. Can new approaches be identified in your field which suits this new paradigm better?
  63. 63. Can convincing arguments be identified to move from more traditional approaches to the new identified ones?
  64. 64. Should the design of a course unit start with the identification of the method to assess the learning outcomes identified for the unit?
  65. 65. Exercise: Prepare a document in which the ideal teaching, learning and assessment methods/ strategies for one educational unit are described <ul><li>Tuning planning form </li></ul>
  66. 66. Group reflection
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.