Learning Outcomes and Assessment: Achieving Constructive Alignment John Buswell

1. 4th Annual Conference of the Higher Education Academy Subject Network for Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism September 14th 2005 Oxford Learning Outcomes and Assessment: Achieving Constructive Alignment John Buswell University of Gloucestershire and Subject Network Liaison Officer for Leisure

3. By the end of the session, you should be able: • Critically understand the nature and principles of constructive alignment; • Contextualise the developments in an outcomes based approach to learning within the national agenda of higher education and the philosophy of constructive alignment; • Reflect on the appropriateness and effectiveness of your programmes’ teaching, learning and assessment methods; • Appreciate the implications of constructive alignment for teaching, learning and assessment.

4. “When and how students learn depends to a major extent on how they think they will be assessed. Assessment practices must send the right signals to to students about what they should be learning and how they should be learning. The underlying principle (of assessment) is that the assessment tasks should comprise a genuine representation of the objectives of the course or unit” (Biggs 2003:140)

5. Current Issues 1 Changing HE system • Numbers, diversity, AWP • Employability and vocationalism • Technology • Autonomous learners 2 Subject Review Overview Report • TLA and especially assessment “weaknesses were frequently evident in the relationship between learning outcomes, assessment criteria, marking and the written feedback provided for students”

7. Critical thinking …..”a lack of academic challenge for students in some of the provision” The ‘Susan/Robert’ Model (Biggs 1999)

9. Robert Less committed than Susan and possibly not as bright Less developed relevant knowledge Has few questions Believes that repeating lecture notes and knowledge learnt in assessments is sufficient Susan Academically committed, bright and interested in her studies Clear academic and career plans Well prepared Has possibly undertaken independent study tasks! Reflects on the personal significance of what she has learnt Aligning the curriculum for deep and effective learning

10. High level engagement Theorising Applying Relating Explaining Describing Note-taking Memorising Academic Susan B A Non-academic Robert PassiveStudent Activity RequiredActive Low level engagement Teaching method Biggs (1999)

11. “Good teaching is getting most students to use the higher level cognitive processes that the more academic students use spontaneously” (Biggs 1999) • Good teaching narrows the gap

12. A little test for you! Take a higher education programme you are familiar with. How many learning outcomes does it have? Please briefly list the main features of the programme in terms of what it is trying to achieve in its graduates and compare with the person next to you. • Outcomes based approaches to learning and recent national developments including constructive alignment What is constructive alignment?

13. Are we ready for constructive alignment? • The move towards an outcomes based approach • to learning • 1. early 1990s Employment Department initiatives • early-mid 1990s modularisation of HE curriculum • (UoG 1990) • 1995-97 HEQC Graduate Attributes • Credit Consortia and level descriptors • 5. 1997 Dearing - Programme Specifications, • Subject Benchmark Statements and Progress Files • 6. 1997- QAA - development of policies and the thrust of • Subject Review • 7. 2000- LTSN/Higher Education Academy

14. Alignment with national agenda and institutional culture/policies-the learning environment Alignment between Student and tutor perceptions Learning outcomes and all TL activities and assessment What the learner does in relation to learning outcomes What the teacher does to create a learning environment What is constructive alignment?

15. Constructive because: • The emphasis is on student learning. Students construct their own meaning and apply the knowledge learnt in particular contexts • Not de-contextualised elements of knowledge but holistic, complex knowledge and skills • It is functioning knowledge rather than declarative knowledge (Deep rather than surface learning) with performative understanding (Barnett 2000) • Perhaps also what the teacher does to extend their own learning (when we have the space!)

16. Methods that foster active and long term engagement Tutor’s personal commitment Clearly stated academic expectations Opportunities to exercise responsible choice Previous experiences which encourage these approaches Assessment methods emphasising recall or trivial procedural knowledge Poor or absent feedback Lack of independence in studying Previous experiences which encourage these approaches Encouragement ofDeep approaches Surface approaches

17. The Principles underlying constructive alignment 1 Focusing attention on what students are learning 2 Making it transparent and explicit 3 Promoting a consistent language to discuss students’ learning 4 Seeking alignment between what students are intended to learn, the means by which learning is promoted and the criteria on which achievement is judged 5 Encouraging students to understand how, when, what and why they are learning

18. Yet it is a major challenge, even here! • Critics of OBL – positivist, mechanistic and containing banality, instrumentalism and epistemological problems (Eccleston 1999) • “embedded within this sensible, rational approach to the design, delivery and assessment of students’ learning are complexities that will take many years to work through. At the most basic level the outcomes approach is alien to many teachers. We should not underestimate the amount of work and cultural change required in order to reconceptualise learning in the way that subject benchmarking and other QAA policies encourage” (Jackson 2002)

19. Role of QAA policies in constructive alignment (Jackson 2002) reference points design tools and curriculum representations Programme Specification * Learning Outcome * Teaching, learning and assessment processes that enable intended outcomes to be achieved and demonstrated * Curriculum structure (may include curriculum maps) Module specifications subject benchmark statements requirements of professional and statutory bodies institutional policies teaching system what the teacher does learning system what the student does what is actually taught and learnt

20. How does it work? • Decide on learning outcomes/content – skills emphasis Verbs are the key -Biggs’ SOLO taxonomy, Bloom’s taxonomy, Level Descriptors What level of understanding do we want from our students (in the context of hospitality, leisure, sport and tourism)? • Design teaching and learning activities to reflect the learning outcomes • Identify assessment methods which are embedded in the TL activities

21. How does it work (cont.)? 4. Assessment drives learning “The assessment is the curriculum as far as the student is concerned” (Ramsden 1992) ‘Backwash’ (Biggs) “Students learn what they think they will be tested on” ‘assessment is usually where alignment is destroyed’ Biggs 2003) ‘This requires a “robust system of assessment’”(Elton and Johnson 2002) “If you want to change student learning, change the methods of assessment” (Brown 1997)

22. Match with learning outcomes and teaching and learning activities • Criterion-referenced process with clear criteria and grade descriptors • Qualitative? No compensation? • End of degree classifications? • PDP

23. Implicit in programme specification -the need to show how/where learning outcomes are achieved 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 etc curriculum building blocks Bench marks programme outcomes A B C D E F G H 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 etc TPA TPA P TPA P TPA TPA TPA TPA TPA P TPA TPA P TPA TPA TPA TPA PA TPA PA TPA TPA TPA TPA P P T=taught P= developed through practice A=assessed

24. Implications (issues) for assessment practice • Comprehensive and explicit documentation Programme specifications Module guides with alignment clearly demonstrated and especially clear assessment tasks, assessment criteria (weighted?) and grade descriptors (how many bands) • Verbs in assessment to encourage deep learning and to match learning outcomes • All learning outcomes assessed? • More portfolios (PDP), problem-based learning and reflection

25. Diversity to reflect student intake and range of learning outcomes • Balance across the four QAA aspects including the skill of transfer • Key (transferable) skills taught, practised and assessed? Progression through the levels? • Importance of formative feedback including examination scripts handed back with full comments?

26. References • Barnett, R (2000) Supercomplexity and the Curriculum, Studies in Higher Education, Vo.25,. No.3, 255-267 • Biggs, J (2003) Teaching for Quality Learning at University, 2nd Edition, SRHE & Open University Press, Buckingham • Boud, D., Cohen, R & Walker, d (1993) Using Experiences for Learning, Open University Press, Buckingham • Bourner, T (1997) Teaching methods for learning outcomes, Education and Training, Vol.39, N0.9, 344-348

27. Elton, L (2004) A Challenge to Established Assessment Practice, Higher Education Quarterly, Vol.58, No.1, January, 43-62 • Jackson, N (2002) QAA: Champion for Constructive Alignment, LTSN Generic Centre, November • NCIHE (1997) Higher Education and the Learning Society (The Dearing Report) NICHE/97/850, London:HMSO