DEVELOPING REALISTIC LEARNING OUTCOMES - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 19
About This Presentation
Title:

DEVELOPING REALISTIC LEARNING OUTCOMES

Description:

DEVELOPING REALISTIC LEARNING OUTCOMES Trevor Hussey & Patrick Smith * Undergraduate Career We assume an overall process in which students shift from relative ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:99
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 20
Provided by: wiki57
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: DEVELOPING REALISTIC LEARNING OUTCOMES


1
DEVELOPING REALISTIC LEARNING OUTCOMES
  • Trevor Hussey Patrick Smith

2
MALCOLM ZUKAS (2001 35)
  • "...the language of objectives, outcomes,
    competences and empowerment of the learner has
    'seduced' both policy makers and practitioners in
    many areas of education."

3
EISNER (2000 344)
  •  "The vision of a uniformed army of young
    adolescents all marching to the same drummer,
    towards the same objective, may be one that
    gladdens the hearts of technocrats, but it is a
    vision that has little or nothing to do with
    those delicious outcomes that constitute the
    surprises of educational experience."

4
THE STORY SO FAR
  • Concern for realistic learning outcomes
  • Dangers of disaggregation of curriculum
  • This critique should be understood as

5
THE TROUBLE WITH LEARNING OUTCOMES
  • Often not referred to
  • Spurious clarity, explicitness objectivity
  • Insensitive to different disciplines
  • Restrictive thresholds emergent outcomes

6
INTENDED LEARNING OUTCOMES (ILOs)
  • ILOs are formulated and directed by the teacher
    or others and refer to what students should be
    able to demonstrate in terms of knowledge, skills
    and/or attitudes as a result of a learning
    episode.

7
EMERGENT LEARNING OUTCOMES (ELOs)
  • ELOs emerge from what happens in classrooms
    between learners, teachers and the curriculum.
    They cannot be pre-specified, though some are
    more likely than others and some may be more
    desireable than others.

8
THE ARTICULATED CURRICULUM
Intentions
Methods
Content
Judgements
CONTEXT
9
ILOs ELOs
  • ILOs

Contingent
Related
Incidental
ELOs
10
PREDICTED/UNPREDICTED, DESIRED/UNDESIRED
Predicted
A
C
Desired
Undesired
B
D
Unpredicted
11
TOWARDS MORE REALISTIC LEARNING OUTCOMES
  • More generous LOs
  • Learners as well as teachers LOs
  • Changing curricular arrangements
  • Some outcomes cannot be measured

12
STUDENTS IN TRANSITION
  • A significant change in a students life,
    self-concept and learning a shift from one state
    of understanding, development and maturity to
    another.

13
TRANSITIONS THE UNDERGRADUATE CAREER
AUTONOMY
INTERDEPENDENCE
DEPENDENCE
Pre-entry Induction
Year One
Year Two
Year Three
Post Graduation
14
ORGANISING QUESTIONS
  • How far will students needs, responses agendas
    be taken into account?
  • What balance is appropriate between instructional
    and expressive outcomes?
  • How will emergent learning outcomes be treated?

15
CONCLUSIONS
  • ILOs represent approximate intentions
  • Engaged motivated students generate ELOs
  • Developing autonomous students means negotiation
    of outcomes
  • Others are exploring alternatives UCLans
    personalised learning outcomes

16
SOURCES REFERENCES
  • Bruner J (1960). The process of education.
    Cambridge. Harvard University Press.
  • Eisner E (1975). Instructional and expressive
    objectives. In Golby et al (1975) Curriculum
    Design. London. Croom Helm Open University.
  • Eisner E (2000). Those who ignore the past
    Journal of Curriculum Studies 32 (2) 343 357.
  • Gentle P (2001). Course cultures and learning
    organisations. Active Learning in Higher
    Education, 2 (1). 8 30.

17
SOURCES REFERENCES
  • Jackson N, Wisdom J Shaw M (2003). Guide to
    busy academics using learning outcomes to design
    courses and assess learning. York. LTSN Generic
    Centre.
  • Lampert M (1985). How do teachers manage to
    teach? Harvard Educational Review 55 (2) 178-194.
  • Lewis Tsuchida (1998). A lesson is like a
    swiftly flowing river how research lessons
    improve Japanese education. American Educator.
    Winter. 12 -17 50 52.
  • Malcolm J Zukas M (2001). Bridging pedagogic
    gaps. Teaching in Higher Education, 6 (1). 33
    42.

18
SOURCES REFERENCES
  • McAlpine et al (1999). Building a metacognitive
    model of reflection. Higher Education 37.
    105-131.
  • MacLellan E (2004). How convincing is alternative
    assessment? Assessment Evaluation in Higher
    Education, 29 (3). 311 321.
  • Shavelson Stern (1981). Research on teacher's
    thoughts, judgements, decisions and behaviours.
    Review of Educational Research, 51 (4).

19
CONTACT DETAILS
  • Professor Trevor Hussey
  • Email Trevor.Hussey_at_bcuc.ac.uk
  • Professor Patrick Smith
  • Email Patrick.Smith_at_bcuc.ac.uk
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com