Lynnette Mann

IST 511

Fall 2017

Literature Review

The quality of higher education has been an important topic and driving force for the

implementation of a process for student learning outcome (SLO) assessment. SLO assessment is

the gathering and use of evidence of student learning for data-driven decision-making and in

improving institutional performance and strengthening community accountability (Kuh, et al.,

2014). The emerging shift from teaching to learning and from inputs to outcomes (Caspersen,

Smeby, & Aamodt, 2017) has guiding the way for building relevant and measurable student

learning outcomes at the institutional, program and course levels.

A key component is intending to improve the quality of the learning outcome. Each

institution develops their individual assessment process. Generally, the process has four main

stages: course outline; create SLO and assessment; faculty implement and assess SLO; and as a

community, faculty review findings and adjust curriculum, objectives and SLOs. The SLO

assessment cycle provides a systematic approach to evaluating student performance based on a

set of clearly defined outcomes.

From the teaching perspective, course SLOs focus on the students rather than the delivery

method. Instructors can use the resulting data to measure student progress and adjust instruction

based on that progress. SLOs support deep learning for students (Driscoll & Wood, 2007), and a

means for the instructor to ascertain if a student has learned the content. Results of a study
supports the concept of deeper learning for students when they have a clear idea of the direction

and expectations of the course (Trigwell & Prosser, 1991).

Well-written SLO provide meaningful data for analysis. One of the characteristics of

well-written SLO is measurability – a benchmark or target – so that faculty can determine the

level of success. Bloom’s Taxonomy (Krathwohl, 2002), a well-established model for the levels

of cognitive domain, provides a framework to write SLO using appropriate cognitive level for

the material (Kidwell, Fisher, Braun, & Swanson, 2013). A list of measurable verbs have been

complied to align with the classifications that comprise Bloom’s Taxonomy (Stanny, 2016).

Research shows the effective use of taxonomies in the design and application of appropriate

assessment tasks must continue (Melguizo & Coates, 2017).

 References

Caspersen, J., Smeby, J.-C., & Aamodt, P. O. (2017). Measuring learning outcomes. European

Journal of Education, 52(1), 20-30. doi:10.1111/ejed.12204

Driscoll, A., & Wood, S. (2007). Developing Outcomes-based Assessment for Learner-centered

Education. Sterling: Stylus.

Kennedy, D. (2006). Writing and Using Learning Outcomes: A Practical Guide. Cork: University

College Cork.

Kidwell, L. A., Fisher, D. G., Braun, R. L., & Swanson, D. L. (2013). Developing Learning

Objectives for Accounting Ethics Using Bloom's Taxonomy. Accounting Education: an

international journal, 22(1), 44-65.

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A Revision of Blooom's Taxonomy: An Overview. Theory Into Practice,

41(4), 212-218.

Kuh, G. D., Ikenberry, S. O., Jankowski, N., Cain, T. R., Ewell, & Hutchings, P. (2014). Using

Evidence of Student Learning to Improve Higher Education. John Wiley & Sons,

Incorporated. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-

com.library2.csumb.edu:2248/lib/csumb/detail.action?docID=1882234

Melguizo, T., & Coates, H. (2017, July-September). The Value of Assessing High Education

Student Learning Outcomes. AERA Open, 3(3), 1-2. doi:10.1177/2332858417715417

Stanny, C. J. (2016). Reevaluating Bloom's Taxonomy: What Measurable Verbs Can and Cannot

Say about Student Learning. Education Science, 6(4), 1-12.

Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (1991). Improving the quality of student learning: the influence of

learning. Higher Education, 22, 251-266.