Learning outcomes are an essential component of the constructive alignment model for course design (Biggs & Tang, 2007; Wiggins & McTighe, 2005) as illustrated in the graphic below. The premise of constructive alignment is that the teaching and learning activities (i.e. lectures, seminars, readings, experiential components, etc.) will be designed to provide opportunities for students to develop the knowledge, skills and attributes stated in the learning outcomes. Assessments (e.g. tests, essays, research proposals, presentations, graded course engagement, etc.) serve to measure to what degree students are achieving the learning outcomes. Assessments also offer feedback to the student on their progress toward meeting the learning outcomes and to the instructor on the effectiveness of the teaching and learning activities in supporting students in achieving the learning outcomes.

Clearly defined and intentionally integrated course learning outcomes can:

• enhance your design of the course and provide a framework for students’ learning;
• communicate to students what the learning priorities are for the course
• improve communication with students and other instructors regarding the important concepts and skills covered in a course; and,
• improve assessment practices (Simon and Taylor, 2009).

Learning outcomes vs instructional goals

When designing a course, it is natural to think about it from our perspective as the instructor – what we will teach, how will we teach it, and what our assessments will be. Statements written from the perspective of what the instructor will do are instructional goals, not learning outcomes. Learning outcomes shift the perspective from instructional design to student learning. Unlike instructional goals, learning outcomes describe what constitutes evidence of student learning and can support instructors in designing assessments.

For example, the following statements represent instructional goals:

• Offer students the opportunity to participate in open dialogue
• Cover the following topics: Euler’s formula, complex numbers, and factoring polynomials
• Enhance students’ understanding of phase transitions and Landau theory
• Provide a broad introduction to microbiology to non-biologists in lectures and readings

Instructional goals do not tell us what will be expected of students, to what level, and how that will be measured or assessed.

When we begin designing or redeveloping our courses the best place to start is at the end. Ask yourself: by the end of the course, what will students have learned?  The answer to this question can be the first step in developing the learning outcomes for your course.

Course learning outcomes are typically presented using the following ‘formula’:

BY THE END OF THE COURSE, STUDENTS/YOU WILL BE ABLE TO:

[MEASURABLE LEARNING VERB]   +   [SPECIFIC LEARNING STATEMENT]

Consider these examples of course learning outcomes:

By the end of the course, you will be able to:

• articulate design considerations that reflect both individual and societal concerns
• formulate conjectures and discover proofs
• analyze the behaviour of realistic nonlinear systems
• identify all major syntactical constructions of the Latin language

You’ll notice that each learning outcome focuses on the learner, specifically stating what each student should be able to know, do, and/or value by the end of a course.

Let’s examine each component of the learning outcome ‘formula’:

The learning statement

Learning outcomes describe the knowledge, skills, and values/attributes that learners will have the opportunity to develop as they progress through the course.

Knowledge can be used to describe the disciplinary information covered in the course. This content might be vital to future learning or work in the area. Learning outcomes focused on content might read:

By the end of this course, students will be able to…

• categorize macroeconomic policies according to the economic theories from which they emerge.
• explain the different types of motion associated with each of the three main types of geological fault.

Skills can refer to the disciplinary or generalizable skills that students should be able to employ by the conclusion of the class. Learning outcomes focused on skills might read:

By the end of the course, students will be able to …

• • define the characteristics and limitations of historical research.
  • ask questions concerning language usage with confidence and seek effective help from referenced sources.
  • analyze qualitative and quantitative data to show how evidence gathered supports or refutes an initial hypothesis.

 

Values/attributes can describe the attitudes or beliefs investigated in a particular field or discipline. Value-oriented learning outcomes might focus on ways that knowledge or skills gained in the course will enrich students’ experiences throughout their lives. A learning outcome focused on values might read:

By the end of this course, students will be able to …

• articulate their personal responses to a literary work they have selected independently.
• work cooperatively in a small group environment.
• represent and cite sources consistent with the ethnical production of knowledge and research.

The learning verb (and how to select one)

The learning verb articulates the degree to which students will be expected to demonstrate their learning. This guides the expectations and complexity of your course assessments. Consider the following example:

By the end of the course, you will be able to identify a variety of methodological approaches to the study of literature.

The learning verb in this case is ‘identify’. If this verb were changed to ‘describe’, ‘apply’, ‘compare’, or ‘critique’ the nature of the assessment would be vastly different. Additionally, what each verb suggests can be disciplinary-specific. For example, what ‘critique’ means in a Sociology class would be different than in a Visual Arts class, a Chemistry class, or a Finance class.

When deciding on the learning verb consider the following questions:

• Where does your course sit in the broader program(s) to which it contributes?
• What learning comes before your course and what learning comes after it?
• What year of study will most students be in when they are taking your course?
• What are the prerequisites to your course and is it the prerequisite to another course(s)?
• Are all students in your course in the same program or are there students from different programs or outside of the discipline entirely?

As a practical example, first year students would not typically be expected to analyze and create novel solutions for a complex case study as they have not yet learned the foundational knowledge or approaches to case study analysis; however, it would be appropriate for them to be able to identify, describe, and classify different constructs.

Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Bloom, Engelhart, Furst, & Krathwohl, 1956) is one of the most recognized learning theories in the field of education. Educators often use Bloom’s Taxonomy when determining the appropriate depth and complexity of learning they want students to achieve and to then create assessments that accurately report on students’ progress towards these outcomes (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).

Bloom’s Taxonomy includes three domains of learning – cognitive, affective, psychomotor. Within each domain there is a hierarchy or levels of learning.

The levels are hierarchical, meaning that before a student can be expected to demonstrate learning at a particular level, they must first be able to competently demonstrate learning at the level(s) below it in the hierarchy. If we consider the cognitive domain for example, we can infer that before a student can conduct an analysis, they first need to know the methods of analysis, understand the different elements to review, and consider which method to apply. It is only then that they will be ready to conduct the analysis itself.

There is a collection of learning verbs associated with each level for each domain. For a more detailed review of Bloom’s Taxonomy and to access these collections visit the following websites:

• Bloom’s Taxonomy – Centre for Teaching Excellence, University of Waterloo
• Using Bloom’s Taxonomy to Write Effective Learning Outcomes – Teaching Innovation and Pedagogical Support, University Arkansas
• Active Verbs for Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy – Centre for Teaching Support & Innovation, University of Toronto

Based on various situational factors and contexts, courses typically contain 4-12 broadly stated learning outcomes. There is no magic number of course. Learning outcomes may overlap between course components – this is completely acceptable and in fact may be valuable in supporting your learners through a ‘spiral’ curriculum approach where outcomes are reinforced and scaffolded throughout the course. Just remember, your course’s learning experiences (e.g. lectures, tutorials, labs, experiential education components, active learning, readings, etc.) should align to the course learning outcomes and the assessments (e.g. presentations, discussions, essays, research projects, tests, reflections, creative products, etc.) should directly measure the learning outcomes.

Constructive Alignment

Biggs, J., and Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university. Third ed. Berkshire, UK: McGraw Hill.

Wiggins, G.P., and McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Design.

Learning Outcomes

Developing Learning Outcomes. Centre for Teaching Support & Innovation, University of Toronto.

Learning Outcomes. Centre for Teaching and Learning, University of Western Ontario.

Simon, B. and Taylor, J. (2009). What is the value of course-specific learning goals? Journal of College Science Teaching, Nov/Dec, 53-57.

Skrbic N, Burrows J.. Specifying Learning Objectives, : Ashmore L, Robinson D. (Eds.) Learning, Teaching and Development: Strategies for Action. London: Sage Publications; 2014; 54– 87.

Understanding Essential Requirements. Centre for Teaching Excellence, University of Waterloo.

Writing Intended Learning Outcomes. Centre for Teaching Excellence, University of Waterloo.

Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives

Active Verbs for Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy. Centre for Teaching Support & Innovation, University of Toronto.

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A Taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman.

Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. New York: D. MacKay.

Bloom’s Taxonomy. Centre for Teaching Excellence, University of Waterloo.

Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1973). Taxonomy of educational objectives, the classification of educational goals. Handbook II: Affective domain. New York: David McKay Co., Inc.

Using Bloom’s Taxonomy to Write Effective Learning Outcomes. Teaching Innovation and Pedagogical Support, University Arkansas.