1 / 24

Angela Ho, Ph.D. Associate Head, Educational Development Centre Hong Kong Polytechnic University

Learn about the institutional efforts of Hong Kong Polytechnic University in implementing the outcome-based approach to teaching, learning, and assessment. Discover the milestones in the curriculum revision process and how curriculum design, teaching and learning methods, and assessment strategies are aligned with intended outcomes.

gwells
Download Presentation

Angela Ho, Ph.D. Associate Head, Educational Development Centre Hong Kong Polytechnic University

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. On the Learning-curve: Institutional Efforts in Implementing the Outcome-Based Approach to Teaching, Learning & Assessment Angela Ho, Ph.D. Associate Head, Educational Development Centre Hong Kong Polytechnic University

  2. PolyU’s commitment to the outcome-based approach

  3. Curriculum Revision for the 2005-08 Triennium ‘The goal is to revise our academic programmes to become outcome-based programmes for the development of all-round students with professional competence’ (Guidelines for Curriculum Revision, p.3)

  4. Milestones in the Curriculum Revision

  5. Curriculum Revision: why and what

  6. Curriculum Revision – Why? ‘The ultimate purpose of this curriculum revision is to enhance the quality of our programmes.’ (Guidelines for Curriculum Revision, p.6)

  7. A strategic change for the University involving paradigm shift ‘…… for our University to embark on an explicit re-orientation of our curriculum philosophy to an outcome-based model, and to adopt the concept of constructive alignment to guide our teaching and assessment design.’ (Guidelines for Curriculum Revision, p.2)

  8. Quality programme design informed by a duet of educational philosophies Outcome-Based Education (Spady) PRODUCT of learning Aligning teaching & learning Aligning assessment PROCESS of learning Constructive Alignment (Biggs)

  9. Curriculum Revision – What? • Clarify programme & subject outcomes, addressing • professional / academic knowledge and skills • attributes of all-roundedness • Identify major teaching & learning methods, andjustify that they are conducive to the attainment of intended outcomes • Identify major assessment methods, andjustify that they are appropriate for assessing intended outcomes

  10. Curriculum map Key: I = Introduced; R = Reinforced; A = Assessed

  11. A holistic, institutional approach to implementing outcome-based education

  12. Outcome-based Education Assessment policy Co-curricula Assessment strategies Revised curricula Staff support & development

  13. Assessment policy to support the outcome-based approach • Formal adoption of criterion-referenced assessment (CRA)

  14. Development of assessment strategies • Emphasis on authentic assessment methods • Development of instruments to measure generic competences (Joint project by SAO & EDC, funded by LTC) • Revising the Student Feedback Questionnaire to be outcome-based (Working Group under LTC)

  15. Staff support and development –Documentation phase • Development of resources • Curriculum Revision Website • Curriculum Revision Resource Book • Workshops, short courses, writing-away sessions • open-to-all • Departmental-based • Consultation services to programme leaders • Review of draft programme documents

  16. Staff support and development – Implementation phase Institutional teaching development project • To provide in-kind support to staff & programmes • To develop resources for work-integrated education • To assist teachers in developing generic competences in a professional context • To evaluate the impact of the outcome-based approach

  17. Sharing of lessons learnt

  18. Feedback about the Curriculum Revision exercise Opinions collected: • from 72 academic staff from 21 departments • in April 05, after the submission of revised documents • during 3 forums organised by EDC

  19. Issues pertinent to the success (or otherwise) of the curriculum revision • Shared understanding and vision • Know-how • Workload & motivation • Time for the new curriculum paradigm to ‘sink in’ • Sustained efforts throughout the different phases • Involvement of academic staff – both the ‘Generals’, and the ‘Troops’

  20. Addressing workload and motivation – Some suggestions from colleagues • Funding and support for developing materials for the outcome-based approach • Work done in curriculum revision should be counted towards the total workload • Publications generated from work done in curriculum revision should also be counted

  21. Educational change is a complex learning (and unlearning) process for all involved, not an event. (Scott, 2000)

  22. Allow TIME for the process • Time for the documentation phase June 04 – April 05 • Time for the curriculum revision process ‘… the shift in educational philosophy takes time. This curriculum revision exercise therefore should not be seen as a one-off initiative.’ (Guidelines for Curriculum Revision, p.3)

  23. Sustained efforts throughout the different phases

  24. Involvement of academic staff – Both the ‘Generals’ and the ‘Troops’ • ‘We need to extend beyond the programme leaders and the champions!!’ • Generals (programme leaders) are instrumental in leading the exercise, particularly in the documentation phase • Champions are necessary to exemplify OBE and convince their peers • TROOPS are necessary for actual IMPLEMENTATION

More Related