Learning Outcomes Discussion


Published on

This is a presentation I prepared for my 12 week Course Design Practicum experience for faculty developing hybrid and online courses.

Published in: Education
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • There are 8 main sections of the rubric (these are the 8 General Review Standards and are noted in red letters in the QM Workbook. The rubric consists of 40 Specific Review Standards which are distributed over these 8 general categories. Take the time to point out the organization of the QM Workbook and how the rubric is organized:Eight General Review Standards Forty Specific Review StandardsIn Table Format: 1st column is Specific Review Standards, 2nd column is point value, next columns are for your YES or NO decision, and the last column is the annotation.Talk about QM’s intention to be “holistic” and that a QM review is intended to ensure that all parts of the course work together. You can use the metaphor of a cake recipe. Baking a cake is fairly simple if you follow the recipe and correctly measure and add the right ingredients (and the result is also fairly simple and straightforward: if you do it correctly, you end up with a cake). Reviewing an online course is much more complex: not only must you include all the “ingredients” but they must all work together to support the learning objectives. For example, you could have strong, measurable learning objectives but if they don’t align with the assessments, you still don’t have a quality online course.NOTE: Your discussion of alignment should be brief and introductory; you will spend more time explaining “Alignment” in another section of the presentation.
  • Again, highlights the General Review Standards that must work together. Note that although there are only four boxes here, there are actually FIVE standards that align.
  • Learning Outcomes Discussion

    1. 1. Course Design Practicum<br />Module 4<br />Learning Outcomes<br />
    2. 2. Learning Outcomes<br />Studentswill<br />DO WHAT (how)<br />
    3. 3. SACS Criteria<br />CS 3.3.1 Institutional Effectiveness<br />The institutionidentifies expected outcomes for its educational programsand its administrative and educational support services;<br />assesses whether it achieves these outcomes;<br />andprovides evidence of improvement based on analysis of those results<br />
    4. 4. The QM Rubric <br />Eight General Standards: <br />Course Overview and Introduction<br />Learning Objectives / Outcomes (Competencies)<br />Assessment and Measurement<br />Resources and Materials<br />Learner Engagement<br />Course Technology<br />Learner Support<br />Accessibility<br />Key components must align.<br />Alignment:Critical course elements work together to ensure that students achieve the desired learning outcomes.<br />
    5. 5. Steps in Student Learning Outcomes Assessment<br />Define intended educational outcomes <br />Identify methods of measuring outcomes:<br />Where in the curriculum or program would we expect that learning to occur?<br />When and how data are collected<br />Administer assessments<br />Review results and use to make decisions regarding program improvement<br />Repeat assessments in subsequent cycles to track improvements, change, trends, relevancy<br />
    6. 6. Questions<br />How many of you teach courses that are part of a program that has stated outcomes?<br />Do you know what these outcomes are?<br />Give Examples.<br />
    7. 7. Program Learning Outcomes<br />Think of the “ideal” students or graduates<br />What students must know?<br />What students can do?<br />What students care about (think)?<br />
    8. 8. Curriculum Mapping<br />
    9. 9. Opportunities for Measuring Student Learning Outcomes<br />Capstone courses <br />Thesis/dissertation<br />Internships<br />Embedded in assignments/examinations in specific courses in the curriculum<br />Note: Programs do not have to measure every outcome every year using all students. A multi-year plan to assess specific outcomes on a staggered basis is more effective in terms of the reality of the time available and the capacity of the faculty to process the results and determine how to make improvements.<br />
    10. 10. Questions<br />How many of you have course learning outcomes mandated / required by your department?<br />Give Examples.<br />How many of you do not have these mandated course learning outcomes?<br />
    11. 11. Guidelines to Writing Learning Outcomes<br />Aligned with mission statements<br />Program level<br />Stated from student perspective<br />Intended learning outcomes (will)<br />Specific<br />Can be measured by multiple methods<br />
    12. 12. Student Learning Outcome Assessment Techniques<br />Direct<br />Indirect<br />Standardized tests<br />Performance on licensure or professional exams<br />Essays<br />Exhibits<br />Performances<br />Course assignments<br />Portfolios of work samples<br />Authentic assessments<br />Job placement rates<br />Student surveys<br />Graduate follow-ups<br />Focus groups<br />Exit interviews<br />
    13. 13. Aligning Quality Matters Standards<br />Course Learning <br />Objectives / Outcomes (2)<br />Learner Interactions & Activities (5)<br />Resources, Materials (4) & <br />Technology (6)<br />Assessment and Measurement (3)<br />
    14. 14. General Standard 2: Learning Objectives (Outcomes)<br />
    15. 15. General Standard 2:Learning Objectives (Outcomes)<br />