Model+course+specification

**Summary of tasks** **Formative task 2 (FT2)** In small groups, devise a course/module (minimum 20 HE credits corresponding to FHEQ levels) for delivery in one of the modes supported by your institution, e.g. traditional face-to-face (F2F) or blended delivery, etc. This must include some learning technology-enhancement. The group are expected to document evidence of their development process and contribute to the course discussion fora. //Due: Saturday 24th March (online) or Wednesday 28th March (attending)// **Summative Task 2 (ST2)** Individually, justify and critique the course/module developed by your group, amended by you in response to the mock validation event. Include (a) a rationale for the technology enhanced elements of the course (as part of your justification and critique) and (b) the amended course specification as an appendix to your submission (1500 words or equivalent, excluding appendix). //Due: 24th May 2012// //As a way of starting your group off in the process of designing a curriculum, we have developed some notes that you can read through. There are also some helpful exercise and activities to spark off discussion and action. You should also draw on the materials either in Moodle for each week’s topics, or what was presented in class.// The nature of the curriculum Definitions of the curriculum are contested: Quinn (2000) p132 usefully summarises different interpretations of the concept as follows: 1.Curriculum as objectives (after Tyler, 1949) „Any statement of the objectives of the School should be a statement of changes to take place in students.‟ 2.Curriculum as subject matter (after Bell 1973) „A curriculum is the offering of socially- valued knowledge, skills and attributes made available to students through a variety of arrangements during the time they are at school, college or university‟ 3.Curriculum as student experiences (after Kerr 1968) „Curriculum is all the learning which is planned or guided by the school whether it is carried on in groups or individually, inside or outside the school‟ 4.Curriculum as opportunities for students (after Quinn 1988) „A curriculum is all the educational opportunities encountered by students as a direct result of their involvement with an educational institution.‟ It is the latter interpretation to which we tend, recognising that there has been a significant shift in thinking about curriculum in higher education in recent decades, away from considering it in terms of //what is taught//, towards a more student-centred focus on //what is learned//, termed by some as a Copernican shift, which places the student rather than the tutor at the centre of the learning universe. Hence a move away from prescribing a syllabus in terms of a list of reading plus lectures, into describing it instead as learning outcomes, setting out what it can be expected that a student would know or be able to do at the end of a programme of learning Read Chapter 6: Curriculum theory and practice of Principles and Practice of Nurse Education, (Quinn 2000). **Quinn, F. (2000) //Principles and Practice of Nurse Education//, London: Nelson Thornes ISBN 0748738959** This provides a detailed and clear review of the literature and thinking on applying curriculum theory to practice **Chickering, A.W. & Gamson, Z.F. 1987, 'Seven Principles For Good Practice in Undergraduate Education'.** http://ctlv3.byu.edu/uploads/Seven%20Principles%20for%20Good%20Practic e%20in%20Undergraduate%20Education- %20Chickering%20and%20Gamson.pdf This is an excellent and practical article about some of the principles underpinning the development of curriculum Underpinning values for course design The philosophy of a course will be dependent on the value espoused by those involved in designing it. Inevitably these will vary from course team to course team, but many UK HE courses for new staff, for example, use the values developed by the Staff and Educational Development Association, (SEDA) see http://www.seda.ac.uk/ SEDA‟s work is underpinned by (the expansions in italics are interpretations by the authors of this course): 1An understanding of how people learn //(essentially a commitment to the use of pedagogic research on learning applied to practice);// 2Scholarship, professionalism and ethical practice; 3Working in and developing learning communities; 4Working effectively with diversity and promoting inclusivity //(including// //race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, age, class and// //disability);// 5Continued reflection on professional practice //(the ability to collect,// //analyse and act on information about personal and collective// //achievement)//; 6The development both of people and educational processes and systems //(reflecting a commitment to one’s own personal and professional development and that of those around us).// These values have applicability wider than the context in which they were derived. Course Design Approaches Knight (2002 p170-171) proposes five curriculum planning models. The first, **Content-led planning** starts with the identification of content, which is then sliced up according to the time available, then teaching and learning methods are chosen, then decisions are made on how to assess students. Knight suggests that this is a simple, traditional and well-established approach to curriculum planning but worries that it can lead to casual treatment of all other requirements, unfocused teaching and poor assessment practices, with a lack of coherence. The second model, **Rational planning**, starts with the identification of learner needs, after which learning outcomes are chosen for the relevant programme specification or new ones are written, then relevant student characteristics and diversity are identified, before choices are made accordingly about course materials and pedagogic methods. Although Knight is attracted to this approach, he argues that this isn‟t really how people work in real life, and gives excessive prominence to the importance of learning outcomes //per se,// with the actuality of course development being characterised much more by leaps of insight and lurches in activity. Model three, **Assessment-led planning** starts again with the identification of learner needs and the selection or writing of appropriate learning outcomes and then moves logically from there to thinking about how these will be assessed before finally choosing and aligning course materials. Many argue that if you get the assessment right and align it closely with the learning outcomes, then good curriculum design will follow seamlessly, particularly since student activity tends to be heavily prompted by assignment demands. To be genuinely effective, some would further suggest that we need to turn the curriculum design process on its head, linking learning outcomes with assessment design from the outset, and moving on to detailed content and delivery planning once this has been achieved.“//Despite the good intentions of staff, assessment tasks are set which encourage a narrow instrumental approach to learning that emphasises the reproduction of what is presented at the expense of critical thinking, deep understanding and independent activity//.” Boud 1990 p104 However Knight feels that this approach is similar to criticisms made of rational approaches and expresses once more concerns about the supposed precision of learning outcomes. His fourth model he calls **Fuzzy planning**, which takes as its starting point the course author‟s own view (often implicit) of what counts as worthwhile learning, and uses the author‟s recollections of teaching and learning methods that made for valuable learning and then imagining how they could be opportunities and possibilities for learning (he calls these „//affordances//‟) with the material expected to be covered, before considering what sorts of learning that could reasonably be expected to follow. Knight is strongly attracted to this model, appreciating the “continued to-and-fro process of deliberation which starts with an interplay between the designer‟s values and his or her store of teaching, learning and assessment techniques‟. Once worthwhile learning and assessment sequences have been imagined as possible learning „affordances‟, it is usually quite easy to set them alongside programme specification and see two or three learning outcomes that could be honestly appropriated” (op cit p170). However, others would argue against the very thing that Knight values, the reliance on sophisticated „imagining‟ and the lack of strong specification of outcomes. Model five is **Planning for Problem-Based Learning (PBL)**. This again commences with the selection or writing of learning outcomes, followed by the identification of topics to be covered. The next stage is to imagine a set of problems that collectively would require students to cover all this material and then to write problems to fit in a standard sequence (typically one week per problem). PBL is widely used in a variety of medical and other disciplines and radically replaces conventional curricula by putting tasks at the centre of learning. The University of Maastricht is generally acknowledged as being the original proponent of this approach, which offers students complex, authentic tasks: new information is provided in the form of lectures, seminars and lab classes, designed specifically to link to material that supports that week‟s problem, rather than offering separate lecture courses, on say, haematology or anatomy that are taught and assessed discretely. Much has been written on the issues associated with designing PBL (a very extensive publications list on PBL can be found at http://www.unimaas.nl/pbl/default.htm, accessed January 2006). Knight argues that the biggest difficulties in planning for PBL lie around the difficulties in devising authentic problems that provide full coverage of the ground to be covered while staying faithful to independent group learning methods. Knight, P. (2002) Being //a Teacher in Higher Education//, Buckingham: SRHE/OU Press ISBN 0335209300 Applying theories on learning to course design Ramsden (2003) suggests there are five issues that need to be addressed when considering how we can apply theory to the practice of designing and structuring courses: 1What do I want my students to learn, and how can I express my goals to them and make these goals clear to myself and my colleagues? 2How should I arrange teaching and learning so that students have the greatest chance of learning what I want them to learn? This is the problem of //teaching strategies.// 3How can I find out whether they have learned what I hoped they would learn? This is the problem of //assessment.// 4How can I estimate the effectiveness of my teaching, and use the information I gather to improve it? This is the problem of //evaluation//. 5How should the answers to 1-4 be applied to measuring and improving the quality of higher education? These are the problems of //accountability and educational development.// Deciding on the most appropriate and effective teaching strategies is a complex process, and is examined in more depth in the course module on „Learning, Teaching and Assessment‟. This activity may help you to think through the pros and cons of different approaches in relation to the course you are designing. Here some of the methods commonly used: Are seen as cost effective,No more economical than other as lots of students can bemethods if considered in terms of taught togetherlearning gain Can be inspirational andNot particularly effective at conveying engaginginformation by comparison with Provide (sometimesdiscussion and reading unique) opportunities for‘Coverage of the ground’ is superficial cohorts of students to comebecause student engagement is varied togetherStudents tend to be passive and Students and staff expect itdependent when activities concentrate to be a main means ofon transmission transmissionCan be overwhelming for some Provide discussion opportunities for students Enable students to feel that they are part of the programme(if seminar leaders learn names etc) students Lecturers sometimes find it hard to get students to talk Can degenerate into min-lectures if students don’t fully engage Students may not do sufficient preparation in advance Individuals can dominate discussions excessively Enables students to put intoExpensive to resource practice theories learnedCan be time-consuming to set up about in lecturesStudents may ‘follow the recipe’ for Students gain practice inthe practical without understanding measuring and interpretingwhat they are doing dataCan be very repetitive if tasks from Professional skills can be practised and measured Provide authentic learning experiences week to week vary little Difficult for students who miss practicals to catch up Difficult to control the environment Individuals may have very variable experiences as patients/clients present own problems/symptoms Can be undertaken byTakes substantial preparation individuals ‘anytime,Will need regular updating anywhere’ which benefitsUsually best done by teams rather than students with caringindividuals responsibilities Fosters independence and lifelong learning approaches Provide opportunities for individuals or small groups to engage directly with the tutor Expensive to resource Sensitive individuals can feel too much in the spotlight Let students see howCan lapse into dismal sessions where theory relates to practicestudents work on homework and feel Students can work closelytoo intimidated to ask for help on topics supported by the lecturer Students can practice and Resource-intensive in terms of space being made exclusively available for practical work May have health and safety implications to consider demonstrate practical achievements Can offer authentic learning experiences Helps develop students If students are ‘thrown in a the deep team-working and end’ without adequate preparation for independent learning skills group work, they can flounder Can emulate authentic real- life tasks Ramsden, P. (2003) //learning to teach in Higher Education//, London: Routledge FalmerISBN 0415303451 Designing a new course: a checklist of questions Imagine you have been charged with the task of designing from scratch a new course with a relatively short time-scale. Jot down as many questions as you can that you think you would need to ask before you lifted finger to keyboard. Of course, in real life it is unlikely that a new member of staff would be charged with the task of designing a new course single-handedly, but this exercise is designed to get you thinking. It would be quite helpful if you start to scope the task with a blank sheet/screen before looking at the other resources provided here. Below is a list of questions we think need to be asked at the outset when designing a new course, which we present as an unprioritised list. Rank order these according to the ones you think are the ones that need to be tackled first. Include in this list any questions from your list that we have not included. 1What should be the level of the course? Is it at Foundation Level, Undergraduate level, Postgraduate level? Is there natural progression between the levels? 2What is the timescale for the first run of the course? Is there any possibility for slippage? 3What is the duration of the programme? Is the pace of delivery normal or accelerated? Is it possible for students to „step-on and step-off‟ as their personal needs change? 4Who will be contributing with me to designing and delivering the course? Do we have the necessary specialist skills and qualifications to deliver all components? Do we need to recruit or retrain any new full or part- time staff? Is there sufficient budget for this? 5Does the school/faculty/university have designated course leaders or similar? If so, is it expected that, having designed the course, I will be the course leader? What does such a role entail? 6What market research has been done to prove that there are students who want to do this course? How robust is this? Do we know which other HE providers offer similar courses to this in the UK and internationally? Are they potential competitors or collaborators? 7Is there „seed-corn‟ funding in my institution to resource new course development? If so, how can this be accessed? Do Registry (or some other centre within the institution) have ready-reckoners, proformas or other aids to calculation of costs of course design and delivery? 8How much am I expected to get students be involved in commenting on draft course curriculum documentation? Would student reps from other courses be prepared to help? Is there a role for the Student Union? 9Does my course fit in with national, regional and local imperatives? Are there stakeholders who might see themselves as having an important role in shaping the new course? What political and social factors will impact on the design of this course? 10To what extent does my new course articulate with school/Faculty/institutional priorities? How does it link in with the areas of growth outlined in the Corporate plan for the organisation? Where are my potential sources of practical and political support within the institution for this new development? 11How will the course be marketed to prospective students? Who in the institution can help me with marketing? What are the unique and attractive features of my planned course? 12What specialist equipment is available for the teaching/learning support of students (lab equipment, IT, simulated work environments e.g. kitchens/ restaurant areas, hospital wards)? 13What rooms and facilities do we have available for general teaching? What is the capacity of each room? Do these rooms have fixed or flexible seating? Are any of them tiered? What equipment do they include as standard? Are these dedicated rooms for our subject area or are they shared? Are there any periods of the year when they are unavailable (e.g. for conferences or exams) 14Does the library/student learning centre have the necessary books, journals and other resources necessary to support the course? Is there budget available to support additional purchases? Who would I need to liaise with in Learning and Information Services (or similar) to discuss acquisitions? 15To what extent should the programme involve Work-Based learning? Can we support student placements? Is there good employer engagement in appropriate fields? Is there competition for placements/WBL opportunities with other educational providers? 16Will our own institution‟s partner colleges in the UK or internationally be offering this programme accredited by us? What would be the implications for the course if they did so? 17What steps do I need to take to ensure my course is inclusive/SENDA compliant? What steps do I need to take to make sure that disabled students will find the course accessible? Who do I need to approach (e.g. Disability advisor) within the institution who can advise me on these and related issues? Are there any categories of disability that would exclude students from taking this course and are there any ways round this that we can devise? 18What are the university processes that need to be followed in order to get the course validated? How long will this take? Who are the key university contacts whose guidance I can seek? Is there a handbook I need to consult? 19What are the Professional or Subject Body (PSB) requirements that I need to consider? Are there fitness-to-practice requirements? Who needs to be consulted in the first instance? Is there a named contact I can talk to immediately? Will my course need to be accredited by the PSB? How does this happen? What is the timescale? Can the course be professionally accredited retrospectively? How often does periodic review by PSBs take place? 20What teaching strategies would be best for the subject and context (e.g. lecturing, small group teaching, one-to-one teaching, problem-based learning, computer-assisted learning, blended learning approaches, lab work, field trips,.......) (More activities related to teaching strategies will be covered later in these course materials) 21What IT platform does the institution use to support student learning and support? Is this available in all partner colleges in which the programme will be offered? 22What are the best methods to assess student learning for this programme? (e.g. exams, essays, projects, dissertations, products, artefacts, computer-based assessment (these are discussed in detail in the „Learning, Teaching and Assessment‟ course). To what extent do I need to design in alternative assessment strategies for students with disabilities? Is it possible to make all assessment activities inclusive? How many assessment tasks should I include? Do I have to comply with university/PSB requirements on this? Are there practical constraints I need to bear in mind? (More activities related to assessment will be covered later in the materials). 23What would I need to include in the course handbook? Is there an institutional guideline on this? Is there common material (e.g. on student support) that the institution specifies must be included in all course handbooks? 24What will be the admissions policy for this new course? Is this a course for which we will be seeking high „A‟ level, Scottish Higher or equivalent passes for entry? What will our policy be on Access course admissions? 25How far would it be possible for students to enter the course with advanced standing from other programmes e.g. at partner colleges? How applicable would Accredited Prior Learning (APL) and Accredited prior Experiential Learning (APEL) be? 26How will we get feedback on how the students perceive the course? Is there a university evaluation instrument/questionnaire that must be used? Will it be possible to gain feedback from course committees and focus groups? At what intervals will it be expected that feedback is acted on to further enhance the course? 27How often will the course need to be reviewed under institutional processes? What form will this scrutiny take? 28What basic curriculum content would need to be included? How does this translate into learning outcomes? You may have been surprised how many factors may need to be addressed at the initial stages in curriculum development. You will note that the actual content that is to be taught is only a small component of what needs to be considered when designing a course, yet it is often the area that new designers focus on almost exclusively in the first instance. Designing intended learning outcomes Strong and demonstrable links between intended learning outcomes and assessment processes and criteria are central to course design, and the need to align learning and teaching with fit-for-purpose assessment. This section explores how we write intended learning outcomes in course documentation, leading into how we use them in practice in teaching. We will in addition look at how best to use intended learning outcomes as a basis for structuring our feedback to students about their work. Perhaps this is best illustrated by proposing some intended learning outcomes we have identified for this resource: Write intended learning outcomes for your students, to define what they are intended to become able to do when they have successfully completed your new course; Ensure that intended learning outcomes are understandable by students, so that they can use them to monitor how their learning is progressing; Use learning outcomes actively in lectures, tutorials and all other teaching-learning contexts, so that students are aware of what they should be gaining from each study context; Work out what evidence students will need to produce to demonstrate that they have achieved the intended learning outcomes; Link assessment criteria and assessment processes to the learning outcomes in a „fit-for-purpose‟ way; Make informed choices about suitable teaching processes and contexts, so that they lead students towards achieving the intended learning outcomes; Give students feedback on their achievement of the learning outcomes, and the level to which they have achieved them. Note that the learning outcomes above are quite specific, and are set in the context of using this particular resource. They are much „sharper‟ than the aim of this particular resource, which could have been stated thus: „After working through this material you should be able to use intended learning outcomes effectively in your own design of teaching and assessment‟. 1Well-expressed statements of intended learning outcomes help students to identify their own targets, and work systematically towards demonstrating their achievement of these targets. 2Learning outcomes are now an essential element of curriculum documentation to enable quality assurance in the validation of new curriculum developments, or the review of existing curriculum provision. For example they are required, in the higher education sector in the UK, for subject review by the Quality Assurance Agency, and are cross- referenced by Academic Reviewers to the associated assessment processes, instruments and standards. 3In the context of subject benchmarking, learning outcomes can provide one of the most direct indicators of the intended level and depth of any programme of learning. Learning outcomes represent the modern way of defining the content of a syllabus. The old-fashioned way was simply to list topic headings, and leave it to the imagination of the lecturer exactly what each heading would mean in practice, and how (or indeed if) each part of that would be assessed in due course. The present-day usage of learning outcomes has developed from earlier ways of describing curriculum in terms of behavioural objectives. Indeed it can be argued that learning outcomes as usually written //are// simply the intended objectives, and that the real „learning outcomes‟ are the students going forward having achieved the objectives. Nowadays, expressions of learning outcomes are taken to define the content, level and standard of any course, module or programme. External scrutiny (in the UK for example) interrogates assessment criteria against learning outcomes to ensure that the assessment is appropriate in level and standard to the course or module. Even more importantly, however, learning outcomes can be vitally useful to students themselves, who (with a little guidance) can be trained to use the expressed learning outcomes as the targets for their own achievement. The intended learning outcomes are the most important starting-point for any new teaching-learning programme. Learning outcomes give details of syllabus content. They can be expressed in terms of the objectives which students should be able to //show// that they have achieved, in terms of knowledge, understanding, skills and even attitudes. Learning outcomes need also to be clearly linked with the evidence which students will produce, demonstrating their achievement of the outcomes. They are therefore written as descriptors of ways that students will be expected to demonstrate the results of their learning. The links between learning outcomes and assessment criteria need to be clear and direct. Learning outcomes indicate the standards of courses and modules, and are spotlighted in curriculum validation and quality review procedures. Aims are much broader in scope, and as a result less useful to learners, other than to give them a general idea of what the learning outcomes are going to address in more detail. In practice, it is usually relatively easy to identify aims and write them, but much more difficult to break them down into intended learning outcomes, not least as the latter have assessment implications, and need to be „constructively aligned‟ as discussed in Resource No.7. Learning outcomes should not just reside in course validation documentation (though they need to be there in any case). They should also underpin everyday teaching learning situations. They can be put to good use in the following places and occasions: 1In student handbooks, so that students can see the way that the whole course or module is broken down into manageable elements of intended achievement, and set their own targets accordingly. 2At the start of each lecture, for example on a slide or transparency, so that students are informed of the particular purposes of the occasion. 3At the end of each lecture, so that students can estimate the extent to which they have travelled towards being able to achieve the intended outcomes associated with the lecture. 4At the beginning of each tutorial, seminar, laboratory class, and so on, so that students are alerted to the specific purposes of each element of their learning, and can see how it fits into the bigger picture of their course or module. 5At suitable points in the briefing of students for longer elements of their learning, including projects, group tasks, practical work and field work. 6On each element of handout material issued before, during or after lectures, to reinforce the links between the content of the handout and students‟ intended learning. 7On tasks and exercises, and briefings to further reading, so that students can see the purpose of the work they are intended to do. 8On the first few screens of each computer-based learning programme that students study independently (or in groups). 9On-screen in online learning contexts, so that students can remain aware of what they are intended to be getting out of the information, tasks, exercises and feedback responses they experience when learning online. 10At the beginning of self-study or flexible learning packages, so that students can estimate their own achievement as they work through the materials. The steps which follow aim to help you to design learning outcomes which will not only serve course design and validation purposes, but will be directly usable with your students. Please work through each of the stages below, then compare your final version of the learning outcome with the practical suggestions which follow this activity. 1Think of an element you already teach. Think of how students learn this element – for example through a lecture, or some independent work, or some group work, or online. Think also of how students‟ learning of this element is assessed – perhaps using an exam question or a coursework assignment. Jot down Draft 1 of the intended learning outcome for this element (preferably without looking at any existing documentation which includes a version of the outcome). 2Find an alternative way (Draft 2) of expressing the learning outcome, by saying to yourself “what it really means is...” and putting it into different words. It may help to imagine a student who is not clear about the real meaning of Draft 1, and re-expressing it as Draft 2 to make it clearer to this student. 3Choose which of Draft 1 and Draft 2 you feel is best so far. If necessary, make further adjustments to put the intended learning outcome into context, so that students will have a clear idea about when they should expect to have achieved it, and what they may need to do on their way towards achieving it: Draft 3. (Hint: by now, the intended learning outcome should not be starting with the word „to‟. Instead, it may be along the lines „by the end of this lecture, you should be able to...‟, or „after working through these exercises, you‟ll be able to...‟ and so on). 4Next, //listen// to what you now consider the best draft of your intended learning outcome. If possible, get one or two people to read it out to you. Take note of any words which may need strengthening or replacing to make the meaning of the intended outcome as clear as possible. This gives you Draft 4. 5Think about the teaching-learning context that is most suitable for students to achieve the learning outcome. Choose from large-group teaching, small-group learning, independent study, online learning, practical work, and so on. Make sure that your intended learning outcome makes the learning context clear to students. If you make any adjustments, this is now Draft 5. 6Think about the intended //evidence of achievement// of your learning outcome, in other words how students will show that they have achieved it in due course. Select from „in writing‟, „by solving suitable problems‟, „by explaining a concept to others face-to-face‟, and so on. If necessary, adjust the outcome to link it more firmly to the way students will show they have achieved it (Draft 6). 7Think next about how students‟ evidence of achievement of the outcome will be assessed or measured. For example, through an open question in an unseen written exam, or a structured question (for example multiple choice, multiple response), or through a peer-assessed presentation, or through a coursework essay, report or assignment, or by solving problems, and so on. If necessary make further adjustments to the learning outcome to clarify how in due course it will link to assessment to get Draft 7. 8Next, think ahead to how in due course students will get feedback on the extent to which they will have demonstrated their achievement of the learning outcome. Will this become clear to them from comments from tutors? Will a grade or a score be sufficient to give them feedback? Which feedback processes will be best at helping them towards achieving it more fully? 9Now that you have a final version of your intended learning outcome, cross-reference your best draft against the suggestions which follow, and make any adjustments in the light of these suggestions. 10Finally, gain additional feedback on your final version, from anyone who can give you such feedback – your mentor, colleagues – and indeed students. It is natural enough that professional people such as lecturers may feel some resistance to having the content of their teaching „pinned down‟ by pre- expressed statements of intended learning outcome. However, the rationale for using them is so strong that we need to look at some practical pointers which will help even those who don‟t believe in them to be able to write them reasonably successfully. It is in the particular public context of linking learning expressed outcomes to assessment criteria that most care needs to be taken. The following suggestions are intended to help lecturers to put into clear, everyday words the gist of their intentions regarding the learning they intend to be derived from a particular lecture, or a practical exercise, or a tutorial, or students‟ study of a journal paper, and so on – including //each and every// element which makes up a programme of study. 1**Work out exactly what you want students to be able to do by the end of each defined learning element.** Even when you‟re working with syllabus content that is already expressed in terms of learning outcomes, it is often worth thinking again about your exact intentions, and working out how these connect together for different parts of students‟ learning. 2**Don’t use words such as ‘understand’ or ‘know’.** While it is easy to write (or say) “when you have completed this module successfully, you will understand the 3rd Law of Thermodynamics”, it is much more helpful to step back and address the questions: “how will we know that they have understood it?”, “how will they themselves know they have understood it?”, and “what will they be able to do to //show// that they have understood it?”. Replies to the last of these questions lead to much more useful ways of expressing the relevant learning outcomes – and in turn help pave the way to aligning assessment tasks to evidence of achievement of the outcomes. 3**Think ahead to the evidence which students will produce to demonstrate their achievement of the intended outcomes.** It is much easier to design learning outcomes well when you know exactly what you want students to //show// for their achievement of the outcomes. 4**Don’t use the word ‘students’ in your outcomes** - except in dry course documentation. It is much better to use the word „you‟ when addressing students. “When we‟ve completed this lecture, you should be able to compare and contrast particle and wave models of radiation” is better than stating “the expected learning outcome of this lecture is that students will......”. Similarly, use the word „you‟ when expressing learning outcomes in student handbooks, handouts, laboratory briefing sheets, and so on. Students need to feel that learning outcomes belong to them, not just to other people. 5**Help students to take ownership of the intended learning outcomes**. After all, it is they who are intended to achieve them, and it is their evidence of achievement of the outcomes which will be the basis of their exams and other assessed tasks. If students are very conscious of what they are intended to become able to do, they are much more likely to work systematically towards becoming able to evidence their achievement of the outcomes. 6**Work imaginatively with existing learning outcomes.** There may already be externally defined learning outcomes, or they may have been prescribed some time ago when the course or programme was validated. These may, however, be written in language which is not user-friendly or clear to students, and which is more connected with the teaching of the subject than the learning process. You should be able to translate these outcomes into language which will be more useful to your students. 7**Match your wording to your students.** The learning outcomes as expressed in course documentation may be off-putting and jargonistic, and may not match the intellectual or language skills of your students. By developing the skills to translate learning outcomes precisely into plain English, you will help the outcomes to be more useful to them, and at the same time it will be easier for you to design your teaching strategy. 8**Your intended learning outcomes should serve as a map to your teaching programme.** Students and others will look at the outcomes to see if the programme is going to be relevant to their needs or intentions. The level and standards associated with your course will be judged by reference to the stated learning outcomes. 9**Remember that many students will have already achieved at least some of your intended outcomes.** When introducing the intended learning outcomes, give credit for existing experience, and confirm that it is useful if some members of the group already have some experience and expertise which they can share with others. 10**Be ready for the question ‘why?’.** It is only natural for students to want to know why a particular learning outcome is being included in their studies. Be prepared to illustrate each outcome with some words about the purpose of including it. In practice, it may not be appropriate to explain the rationale behind each and every learning outcome in print in student handbooks or other documentation, but it can be really valuable to include such explanation in face-to-face contexts such as lectures, when you can use tone of voice, body language and emphasis to bring the real meaning of the learning outcomes to life in your students‟ minds. 11**Be ready for the reaction ‘so what?’** When students, colleagues, or external reviewers still can‟t see the point of a learning outcome, they are likely to need some further explanation before they will be ready to take it seriously. 12**Work out your answers to ‘what’s in this for me?’**. When students can see the short-term and long-term benefits of gaining a particular skill or competence, they are much more likely to try to achieve it. This particularly applies to „tough‟ learning outcomes. If you explain to students that these particular ones are hard to achieve, but worth the effort, they are less likely to be daunted or give up on them. 13**Don’t promise what you can’t deliver.** It is tempting to design learning outcomes that seem to be the answers to everyone‟s dreams. However, the real test for your teaching will be whether it is seen to enable students to achieve the outcomes. It‟s important to be able to link each learning outcome to an assessable activity or assignment. 14**Don’t however set out to assess students’ achievement of each and every learning outcome.** While there may indeed be an expectation (from professional bodies, quality assurance personnel, external reviewers, external examiners, and so on) that student achievement of the learning outcomes should be duly evidenced and tested, it is perfectly normal to test an appropriately representative cross-section of them rather than all of them in the context of a given cohort of students, and to aim to test all of them over a period of time across several student cohorts. That said, the most important learning outcomes need to be tested each time. 15**Don’t start at the beginning.** It is often much harder to write the outcomes that will be associated with the beginning of a course, and it is best to leave attempting this until you have got into your stride regarding writing outcomes. In addition, it is often much easier to work out what the „early‟ outcomes actually should be once you have established where these outcomes are leading students towards. 16**Think ahead to assessment and feedback.** A well-designed set of learning outcomes should automatically become the framework for the design of assessed tasks and feedback activities. It is worth asking yourself “How can I measure this?” for each draft learning outcome. If it is easy to think of how it will be measured, you can normally go ahead and design the outcome. If it is much harder to think of how it could be measured, it is usually a signal that you may need to think further about the outcome, and try to relate it more firmly to tangible evidence that could be assessed. 17**Keep sentences short.** It is important that your students will be able to get the gist of each learning outcome without having to re-read them several times, or ponder on what they really mean. 18**Consider illustrating your outcomes with ‘for example...’ descriptions.** If necessary, such extra details could be added in smaller print, or in brackets, or in face-to-face contexts such as lectures. Such additional detail can be invaluable to students in giving them a better idea about what their achievement of the outcomes may actually amount to in practice. 19**Test-run your learning outcome statements.** Ask target-audience students „what do you think this really means?‟, to check that your intentions are being communicated clearly. Also test your outcomes statements out on colleagues, and ask them whether you have missed anything important, or whether they can suggest any changes to your wording. 20**Aim to provide students with the whole picture.** Put the student- centred language descriptions of learning outcomes and assessment criteria into student handbooks, or turn them into a short self-contained leaflet to give to students at the beginning of the course. Ensure that students don‟t feel swamped by the enormity of the whole picture! Students need to be guided carefully through the picture in ways that allow them to feel confident that they will be able to succeed a step at a time. 21**Don’t get hung up too much on performance, standards and conditions** when expressing learning outcomes. For example, don‟t feel that such phrases as „on your own‟, or „without recourse to a calculator or computer‟ or „under exam conditions‟ or „with the aid of a list of standard integrals‟ need to be included in every well-expressed learning outcome. Such clarifications are extremely valuable elsewhere, in published assessment criteria. 22**Don’t be trivial!** Trivial learning outcomes support criticisms of reductionism. One of the main objections to the use of learning outcomes is that there can be far too many of them, only some of which are really important. Don‟t write any learning outcomes that can‟t (or won‟t) be assessed. If it‟s important enough to propose as an intended learning outcome, it should be worthy of being measured in some way, and it should be //possible// to measure. 23**Don’t design any assessment task or question that is not related to the stated learning outcomes.** If it‟s important enough to measure, it is only fair to let students know that it is on their learning agenda. 24**Don’t try to teach something if you can’t think of any intended learning outcome associated with it.** This seems obvious, but it can be surprising how often a teaching agenda can be streamlined and focused by checking that there is some important learning content associated with each element in it, and removing or shortening the rest. 25**Don’t state learning outcomes at the beginning, and fail to return to them.** It‟s important to come back to them at the end of each teaching- learning element, such as lecture, self-study package, or element of practical work, and so on. Turn them into checklists for students, for example along the lines “Check now that you feel able to....” or “Now you should be in a position to....”. 26**Consider getting students to indicate, at the end of each learning element, the extent to which they feel that they have achieved the learning outcomes.** For example at the end of a lecture, it can be useful to return to the slide or overhead where the intended learning outcomes for that lecture were introduced, and for each learning outcome in turn, ask students to „vote‟ on how well they feel they have achieved them, for example by raising both hands if they think they have fully achieved it, one hand if they feel they have partially achieved it, and no hands if they feel they have not yet achieved it. This gives you a good indication about which learning outcomes may need re-visiting or consolidating in the next lecture, and so on. 27**Remember that your usage of intended learning outcomes in your teaching will be taken as a measure of the pedagogic quality of your teaching.** If you‟re engaged in a course leading to a Post Graduate Cert. in Higher Education and are being observed in some of your teaching sessions (whether lectures, tutorials or anything else) there are certain to be questions on your observer‟s checklist about whether you make the intended outcomes appropriately clear to students, and whether you return to check how well students have achieved them at the end of your session. Constructive alignment – making it all fit together The term „constructive alignment‟ has become associated with the work of John Biggs (for his most recent discussion see Biggs 2003). In short, constructive alignment can be regarded as making sure that intended learning outcomes link well to evidence of students achievement of the outcomes, to which are applied appropriate assessment criteria to assess students achievement of the outcomes, and allowing students to receive direct and useful feedback on the extent to which they have demonstrated their achievement of the outcomes. A further important dimension of constructive alignment is to make informed decisions about which teaching and learning processes are most important to allow students to move towards achieving the learning outcomes and demonstrating that achievement in appropriate contexts. In short, constructive alignment is about ensuring that assessment, teaching, learning and feedback are all in harmony with each other, and that feedback links well to students evidence of demonstrating their achievement of the intended learning outcomes. A visual way of thinking about this harmony is shown in figure 1 below, adapted by Race (2005) as a „slice‟ of his discussion of the „ripples on a pond‟ model of learning. This provides a way of thinking about the need to link assessment and feedback to students‟ evidence of achievement of the intended learning outcomes. However, constructive alignment also needs the selection of teaching and learning processes and contexts to link to all of these too. Biggs, J. (2003) //Teaching for Quality Learning// at University Buckingham: Society for Research in Higher Education & OU Press ISBN 0335211690 Race, P. (2005) Making Learning Happen, London: Sage ISBN 1412907098 The importance of good assessment design This area is covered extensively in ACAD 1286 „Learning, Teaching and Assessment‟. What follows introduces the concept of designing an assessment strategy: elements of the next section have been adapted from Pickford and Brown (2006), Chapter one. Assessment is not just a final summative act at the end of a learning process. It should be fully integrated so it becomes part of the learning process. Too often how a programme is to be assessed is an afterthought at the end of a creative and detailed curriculum design process. Additionally, hard-pressed course designers tend to fall back on tried (frequently) and tested (rarely) approaches which use conventional methods and approaches, because that‟s the kind of things they‟re always done in the past. If you design the assessment strategy of a course well, you are likely to direct students‟ activities appropriately. Students gain cues about what you value from the assignments/tasks you set and will direct their out-of-class learning activities accordingly. If we focus the tasks we set them on recall and memorisation, and that‟s what they‟ll do! If, however, we want to encourage them to take a deep rather than a surface approach to learning, we need to design assignments intelligently. We need to think not just about the assessment criteria but also about weighting, timing, agency and „fitness for purpose, with imaginative consideration of methods and approaches that can challenge students, be inclusive and suit the topic/ context/cohort/level. They should link clearly to the most sensible //evidence// our students could produce to demonstrate their achievement of the intended outcome. Essential to all forms of assessment is clarity about criteria, and this is particularly the case when the assessor is considering the extent to which practical skills have been satisfactorily demonstrated. We would argue that authentic assessment needs to use „fit-for-purpose‟ assessment approaches. By this we mean that on each occasion we design an assessment instrument, process or strategy we should be seeking answers to a series of questions that can help to make the design of assignments systematic, coherent and aligned with our intentions. Use the questions below to help you think about the assessment strategy of the new course you are designing for Activity 2. Having done so, write a short justification for your assessment strategy. What are our particular purposes for understanding the task on each occasion? These might include: To give feedback; To make a pass / fail decision; To correct errors or remediate problem areas; To motivate or reinforce learning; To grade, rank or categorise students; To testify to fitness-to-practice; To enable informed option or career choice. Is the focus on product, outcome or process, theory or its use in practice? How important is the means by which the outcome is achieved? Does it make sense to assess work in progress as well as the finished product? Is group or teamwork an important component of the achievement? How important is originality/ creativity? To what extent is conformance with standards important? What methods and approaches can we use? A comprehensive overview of assessment methods is provided by Brown and Knight (1994) Assessing Learners in Higher Education „Assessing on the page‟ and „Assessing off the page‟. Methods in use might include, for example, essays, unseen time-constrained exams, vivas, presentations, phase tests, portfolios, in-tray exercises, case-studies, posters, production of artefacts, performances, multiple-choice tests, simulations and Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs). Is group, self or peer assessment appropriate? How useful would computer–assisted assessment be? Tutors usually undertake tasks requiring judgement, but are there opportunities for peers to be involved? To what extent can self assessment be incorporated? And particularly with practical skills, how far can employees, clients and workplace line managers be involved? What about audiences at performances or visitors to exhibitions, displays and installations?       Must it be end point? (Once the student has more or less finished with the subject) Can it be incremental at intervals through the learning experience? Can students have several goes at the same assessment without penalty? To what extent is it important to align with the traditional academic year? Is it possible to accommodate accelerated progress through a programme? To what extent can accreditation of prior learning be incorporated? If we to be reassured that the competence is repeatable (other than just a lucky one-off success)? In professional areas like medicine or aeronautical engineering, most of us would agree that a single incident of success would not be reassuringly comprehensive! want to assess capability, is it enough to assess it once, or do we need Pickford,Brown,(2006) Assessing Learners in Higher Education, London: RoutledgeISBN 041539399x The course specification document below is taken from the University of Greenwich Quality Assurance Handbook, Appendix D1, and followed by the guidelines for planning and completing the specification – these may be useful for your group course-design work (Course Activity 2). On completing this course successfully you will be able to: School Department Code Course Title Course Coordinator Level(//please tick//) 4 5 6 7 Credit Pre-requisites Contact Hours lectures seminars practical sessions tutorials other Private Study Assignments: course work and other coursework forms of assessment Methods of Assessment Grading Mode Weighting % Pass Mark Word Length Outline Details ISBNAuthorDate Number laboratory work examinations other Title Publisher School Department Code Course Title Course Coordinator Level 4 5 6 7 //Please// //delete as appropriate// Credit Pre-requisites Is the student required to pass ALL elements of assessment in order to pass the course? Yes / No Please identify the LAST item of assessment that a student is required to complete Effective Term: (//Term A, or Term B, or Term A and B, and academic session//) Donor Teaching: //(% of teaching from another School)// Donor School: //(providing the additional teaching)// Partner College: //(give College name if course is only available at a Partner College)// Linked Course: //(if this course is taught with another but assessed separately, state with which course)// The first part of this form takes the form of a basic course outline, which should be written in accessible language and provided to students as part of the essential information on a programme and for individual courses. The second part of the form should be completed and sent to the Programmes and Courses Office (PACO) and Planning and Statistics (PAS). A course is equivalent to a „unit‟ in the University‟s previous system. An individual subject code (based on nationally defined criteria) is assigned to each course. This code is supplied by the University‟s Planning and Statistics Office (PAS) in accordance with HESA Guidelines. This category will also determine the price group and related funding for the course and the course can then be easily located on the University‟s course database. The name of the host School where the course is located //and that resources the course// The Head of Department and/or PAS will advise on an appropriate course title. This indicates the term(s) and academic session from which the course is valid and available for use. The name of a lecturer or tutor who is responsible for managing and providing academic leadership for the course, but who may not necessarily teach it //General level// indicates whether the course is a sub-degree (FE), undergraduate (UG), or postgraduate (PG) course. Each course must also be assigned a Higher Education //specific level// 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7, depending on the level of achievement and outcomes expected of students as follows: Level 3Access to Higher Education Level 4Provides basic knowledge, skills and competence. Level 5Involves an extension and reinforcement of theoretical and/or practical aspects of knowledge. Level 6Reflects the synthesis of basic knowledge, skills and competence and equips students with tools of analysis and evaluation. Contributes to the individual‟s professional development, where appropriate. Level 7Provides an opportunity to demonstrate the ability to reflect on the significance and inter-relationships of knowledge acquired from a variety of sources; the ability, on the basis of such reflection, to formulate original ideas and innovative proposals, and the ability to carry out these activities with a fair degree of autonomy. Level descriptors provide a detailed description of the type of learning in which students will be engaged at each academic level. The University recognises that significant work has already been completed on general level descriptors within the UK Academic Framework. It has therefore not sought to develop its own formal descriptors but rather utilises the wealth of material already detailed. The University subscribes to the following basic principles at each level: Learning experience at **//Level 3 (formerly HE Level 0)//** is characterised by meeting required levels of literacy and numeracy and acquiring understanding in core areas of the curriculum, allowing access to defined programmes of study in post-school education. Learning experience at **//Level 4//** involves the acquisition of basic knowledge, skills and competence and is characterised by: raising awareness of introducing to beginning to develop exploring describing beginning to recognise increasing awareness of developing greater/deeper understanding observing and reflecting on beginning to analyse (formally) beginning to recognise (and classify) exploring and reflecting on investigating, critically appraising monitoring, reviewing and evaluating using relevant material to show awareness of different perspectives through reflection critically examining and reflecting on theoretical perspectives and their relevance to practice. **//Level 7//** provides opportunities to: reflect on the significance and inter-relationship of knowledge acquired from a variety of sources; to use such sources, with critical insight, to evaluate findings of a small scale enquiry or other activity; to provide explanations within identified frameworks and/or general theory; formulate innovative proposals; achieve all outcomes with a large degree of autonomy. For more details on each level please see those developed by the South East England Consortium at: **Credit Level Descriptors for Further and Higher Education** Additional and useful guidance can be found in the Northern Ireland Credit Accumulation Scheme at: **Specifications and Guidelines for NICATS (Sections 6.3.3 et seq)** Each course should specify a value in credits, derived from the learning outcomes and the proportion of the academic year which it occupies. At undergraduate level, for example, a 15-credit course is equivalent to one- eighth of a full-time year of study (120 credits). If the course is available for non-credit bearing purposes, this should also be indicated. All courses are assigned to a University department within a School, which is responsible for the academic content of the course. Courses in departments which are outside the host (or „owning‟) School MUST be referred to the relevant Head of Department for approval prior to validation, and „signed off‟ as indicated at the end of the form. The aims should be long-term and strategic; they should identify the overall purpose of the course i.e. its rationale, and try to give a „flavour‟ of the course. Setting learning outcomes assists in the process of defining the academic standards expected for different levels of study, and provides an effective way of communicating to students what a course is about. Clarity in the expression and description of outcomes will help to improve communication with potential employers about what skills, knowledge and understanding graduates possess and help students to understand what it is they are trying to achieve. The learning outcomes should encompass one or more of the objectives of the Greenwich Graduate Attributes. The planned range of learning and teaching activities should be set out and should reflect the learning outcomes for the course. This statement should contain sufficient information to show how the learning outcomes may be achieved (accepting that different activities may be needed to reflect different modes of study).Possible learning and teaching activities include: lecture/class/seminar (face-to-face, video, or computer-mediated) individual or group-based teaching tutorial/project  labs/studio  fieldwork work placements self-study supported by structured learning materials Thought should be given to including the kinds of learning activities designed to foster the development of the Greenwich Graduate Attributes, i.e. those which promote active learning and discovery, such as real-life or simulated case studies, inquiry-based learning, undergraduate research, group projects etc. An indication should be given to students about the proportions of time nominally allocated to different activities on a course (on the basis of 10 hours per credit, which means that a 30-credit course should amount to 300 hours), i.e. what will be devoted to contact hours, their own study time or the completion of assessments. Assessment of a course should measure the skills, knowledge and understanding encompassed by all the learning outcomes. Care should be taken to offer assessment strategies which do give the students an opportunity to demonstrate that they have met the learning outcomes. Whilst it is not expected that each individual outcome will be tied to a specific assessment activity, there should be a degree of mapping possible between them. The methods of assessment should be stated, with appropriate word length for any written assignments, and the balance/weighting of assessment methods should be made explicit. Identify last item of assessment (in time across the session) for funding purposes in returns to HEFCE. //Please identify whether the student is required to pass ALL elements of assessment in order to pass the course (courses where this is the case will be identified on the matrix PAB reports).// Here you should provide an indicative list of books, journals and, where relevant, web sites for the course. These should be appropriate for the level and nature of the course, and in the case of print materials, should be presented in standard format giving the ISBN Number, author, date, title and publisher. It is expected that these indicative course materials and reading will be up-to- date, including recent publications and latest editions, and that course specifications for students will be updated on a regular basis. Course Co- ordinators should be able to justify the inclusion of older publications e.g. on the grounds that they are seminal texts in the field. (http://www.gre.ac.uk/offices/lqu/qa_handbook)
 * Resources and Guidance for Formative Task 2 (leading to Summative task 2)**
 * Further reading:**
 * Method**
 * Lectures**
 * Seminars**
 * Lab practical**
 * Live work environments (e.g. Law drop-in centre)/ clinical sessions**
 * Independent guided learning tasks**
 * Tutorials**
 * Problem classes linked to lectures**
 * Reasons why you might wish to use this method**
 * Some issues associated with this method**
 * Your notes on whether you would choose this method or not**
 * Studio–based learning/ workshops**
 * Student-led group**
 * work**
 * Problem-based learning**
 * Encourages holistic rather**
 * Intensive front-loading of work when designing appropriate problems Is considered radical by some colleagues, so will need championing by a senior colleague**
 * Some students will find the approach very challenging, particularly if they have only encountered traditional approaches previously**
 * than atomised learning**
 * Is frequently very popular**
 * with students**
 * What are learning outcomes?**
 * //When you have studied this resource on learning outcomes, and applied the principles to your group course design, you should be able to://**
 * Why use learning outcomes?**
 * Expressing course content**
 * Aims**
 * Where and when can learning outcomes be made useful to students?**
 * Activity: Design a learning outcome**
 * Designing and using learning outcomes: some practical suggestions**
 * Intended Learning Outcomes**
 * Evidence of achievement**
 * Assessment processes and criteria**
 * Feedback to students**
 * References:**
 * Constructive alignment of assessment**
 * Designing fit-for-purpose assessments**
 * Fit-for-purpose assessment questions**
 * Why are we assessing?**
 * What is it we are assessing?**
 * How are we assessing?**
 * Who is best placed to assess?**
 * When should assessment take place?**
 * Reference:**
 * Designing a course - documentation**
 * Aims Learning Outcomes**
 * Indicative Content Learning and Teaching Activities Learning Time (1 credit = 10 hours)**
 * Course Specification**
 * Assessment Details:**
 * Indicative Course Materials and Reading:**
 * COURSE SPECIFICATION: ADMINISTRATIVE DATA for PAS/BANNER**
 * Guidance on Course specification**
 * Course Subject Code**
 * School**
 * Course Title**
 * Effective Term**
 * Course Co-ordinator**
 * General Level**
 * Specific Level**
 * Learning and Teaching Activities: Level Descriptors**
 * //Level 5//** builds on level 4 and involves an extension and reinforcement of those experiences i.e.:
 * //Level 6//** reflects the synthesis of knowledge, skills and competence and equips students with tools of analysis and evaluation, characterised by:
 * Credit**
 * Department**
 * Aims**
 * Learning Outcomes**
 * Learning and Teaching Activities**
 * Learning Time**
 * Assessment**
 * Indicative Course Materials and Reading**