ࡱ> @B? Kbjbj .&KHH'V$$$ s#z8888 8V2@j V{B r 0'~T#LF##8888888d888'8888#888888888H Q: WRITING STATEMENTS OF LEARNING OUTCOMES Statements of learning outcomes are critical to a transparent assessment process. Stating learning outcomes that are assessable, however, can take practice. If clearly articulated learning outcomes are not provided for any given domain of creditable learning, there is a substantial risk of an arbitrary or idiosyncratic assessment of someones knowledge or skills. With good outcome statements, both assessors and individuals being assessed are converging on the same point from different directions the assessor with a judgment on the individuals knowledge or skill leading to a decision regarding credit; the individual with the gathering or creating of evidence of his or her learning shaped by the outcomes by which it will be evaluated. Without benefit of articulated outcome statements, assessors may inadvertently ask learners to bring or demonstrate learning at a level that is above or below the standards applied to course-based students as well within a broader or narrower scope. Much flows from well-framed learning outcome statements... additional specific criteria, agreements between program assessors and students regarding expectations, possibilities and boundaries for evidence. Good outcome statements suggest the level of learning that is expected by careful use of verb(s) the area of content without, however, being too specific so that one's learning can only be 'fitted' to pre-defined boundaries possible evidence without being prescriptive Here are two examples of outcome statements for someone who is to be assessed for her knowledge of psychology at an undergraduate level: Can write a ten page essay explaining differences between Freud and Jung as expressed in one of the following texts: x, y, or z. Can apply at least two models of psychodynamic analysis to analyze family relationships The first of the two examples has several problems with it the nature of the evidence is prescribed (ten page essay), the level of performance is ambiguous (understanding..), the scope is unclear (differences), and the sources of acceptable information is restricted. This statement leads at once to an assessment that is overly broad (re level) and simultaneously restrictive (sources of learning) that would accommodate only a small population of people who may have delved into psychology on their own. The second example asks for a level of learning for which additional criteria may be readily available (analysis), a scope that is probably representative of many undergraduate curricula (at least two models; family relationships), and an open set of possibilities as to how these outcomes may be demonstrated. DISTINGUISHING AMONG LEARNING OUTCOMES, LEARNING ACTIVITIES, & EVIDENCE OF LEARNING Assessment involves measuring learning outcomes. To do this reliably, assessors need to distinguish among learning activities, learning outcomes, and the evidence or documentation of learning (i.e., learning products). These three components of a typical learning situation are easily confused. Below are some simple questions that illustrate the distinctions Learning Activities: What experiences or strategies led to the outcome(s)? (e.g., work-related experience; attendance at a class, workshop, lecture; original research or independent information gathering; reading; discussion and consultation with experts; other experiences reflected on) Learning Outcome: What does a person know and what is he/she able to do? Evidence of Learning: What tangible products illustrate or document the learning outcome? (e.g., a product, portfolio, performance) It is the learning outcome(s) that warrants consideration as creditable learning, not the activity or the production of evidence per se. PLA provides credit for learning, not experience. The criteria by which learning outcomes are measured are not the same as the evidence itself. For example, writing a paper is a form of evidence; the criteria for assessing the work might involve the level of analysis, synthesis of ideas, supporting generalizations, and the like. Restate each of the following as learning outcomes statements. First, consider each statement as the outcome of a course that may serve as a reference point for a student trying to articulate his or her experiential learning. Then, consider the statement as part of a larger degree program for a student developing a goals statement. Using a database. Course: Program: Analyze literature. Course: Program: Establishing a new business. Course: Program: Knowing principles of sound health care. Course: Program: Negotiation. Course: Program: (*NT 1 G   XZ6C-Up]rw^dƿ髢xh+6CJ\aJha@b6CJ\aJha@b5CJ\aJha@bCJ\aJh+CJ\aJh CJ\aJhHL5CJ \aJ ha@b5CJha@bCJaJh h CJ h CJ hCeCJ ha@bCJha@b5CJ\hHLha@b5CJ \aJ *()*   H ~WXYZgda@b^gda@b & Fgda@b & Fgd gd gda@b$a$gda@b\]NOP()w & Fdd[$\$gd & Fdd[$\$gdgdgd+ p^p`gda@bgda@b$a$gda@bgda@b # )JKǾжвhhh+CJaJh+6CJaJha@b6CJaJha@bCJaJha@b5CJaJh+6CJ\aJh+CJ\aJh+5CJ\aJ"+9AK & Fdd[$\$gd+ & Fdd[$\$gd & Fdd[$\$gd ,1h/ =!"#$% ^ 2 0@P`p2( 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p8XV~_HmH nH sH tH @`@ a@bNormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA D Default Paragraph FontViV  Table Normal :V 44 la (k (No List 0>@0 a@bTitle$a$CJ HH  Balloon TextCJOJQJ^JaJJ^@J  Normal (Web)dd[$\$mH sH PK![Content_Types].xmlj0Eжr(΢Iw},-j4 wP-t#bΙ{UTU^hd}㨫)*1P' ^W0)T9<l#$yi};~@(Hu* Dנz/0ǰ $ X3aZ,D0j~3߶b~i>3\`?/[G\!-Rk.sԻ..a濭?PK!֧6 _rels/.relsj0 }Q%v/C/}(h"O = C?hv=Ʌ%[xp{۵_Pѣ<1H0ORBdJE4b$q_6LR7`0̞O,En7Lib/SeеPK!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xml M @}w7c(EbˮCAǠҟ7՛K Y, e.|,H,lxɴIsQ}#Ր ֵ+!,^$j=GW)E+& 8PK!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlYOo6w toc'vuر-MniP@I}úama[إ4:lЯGRX^6؊>$ !)O^rC$y@/yH*񄴽)޵߻UDb`}"qۋJחX^)I`nEp)liV[]1M<OP6r=zgbIguSebORD۫qu gZo~ٺlAplxpT0+[}`jzAV2Fi@qv֬5\|ʜ̭NleXdsjcs7f W+Ն7`g ȘJj|h(KD- dXiJ؇(x$( :;˹! I_TS 1?E??ZBΪmU/?~xY'y5g&΋/ɋ>GMGeD3Vq%'#q$8K)fw9:ĵ x}rxwr:\TZaG*y8IjbRc|XŻǿI u3KGnD1NIBs RuK>V.EL+M2#'fi ~V vl{u8zH *:(W☕ ~JTe\O*tHGHY}KNP*ݾ˦TѼ9/#A7qZ$*c?qUnwN%Oi4 =3ڗP 1Pm \\9Mؓ2aD];Yt\[x]}Wr|]g- eW )6-rCSj id DЇAΜIqbJ#x꺃 6k#ASh&ʌt(Q%p%m&]caSl=X\P1Mh9MVdDAaVB[݈fJíP|8 քAV^f Hn- "d>znNJ ة>b&2vKyϼD:,AGm\nziÙ.uχYC6OMf3or$5NHT[XF64T,ќM0E)`#5XY`פ;%1U٥m;R>QD DcpU'&LE/pm%]8firS4d 7y\`JnίI R3U~7+׸#m qBiDi*L69mY&iHE=(K&N!V.KeLDĕ{D vEꦚdeNƟe(MN9ߜR6&3(a/DUz<{ˊYȳV)9Z[4^n5!J?Q3eBoCM m<.vpIYfZY_p[=al-Y}Nc͙ŋ4vfavl'SA8|*u{-ߟ0%M07%<ҍPK! ѐ'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0wooӺ&݈Э5 6?$Q ,.aic21h:qm@RN;d`o7gK(M&$R(.1r'JЊT8V"AȻHu}|$b{P8g/]QAsم(#L[PK-![Content_Types].xmlPK-!֧6 +_rels/.relsPK-!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐ' theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK] K&KK8@0(  B S  ? OLE_LINK3 OLE_LINK4 OLE_LINK5 OLE_LINK6 M MMM wJM1G JMS"4(RP}|MNPh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohP^P`OJQJo(hH^`.^`.pp^p`.@ @ ^@ `.^`.^`.^`.^`.PP^P`.88^8`OJPJQJ^Jo( ^`OJQJo(o   ^ `OJQJo(   ^ `OJQJo( xx^x`OJQJo(o HH^H`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(o ^`OJQJo(}(RS"4         rLs        *)Ce'F a %$+(3{G K6M#N1^@`a@bHlm|?fq3O7 \lBv-HLQ>^"wZ5~g3s$ToKM@prK@UnknownG* Times New Roman5Symbol3. * Arial5. *aTahoma?= * Courier New;WingdingsA BCambria Math"hff ! !!r4BB 2qHP ?a@b!xx APPENDIX DmfiddlerInformation Technology   Oh+'0  4 @ L Xdlt| APPENDIX D mfiddlerNormalInformation Technology2Microsoft Office Word@F#@ܜ&@X:B{@X:B{՜.+,0 hp  DePaul University! B  APPENDIX D Title  !"#$%&'()*+,-.012345689:;<=>ARoot Entry F"V{CData 1Table$WordDocument.&SummaryInformation(/DocumentSummaryInformation87CompObjy  F'Microsoft Office Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q