3.1 Introduction

This chapter will discuss how to conduct course alignment and write measurable course outcomes and SMART module learning objectives. Course alignment is a fundamental principle that underpins effective teaching and learning. The role of course alignment is to ensure coherence between program-level outcomes, course outcomes, module learning objectives, learning activities, and assessments, creating a unified learning experience. It provides a clear and consistent framework for teaching and learning, supports the development of students’ knowledge and skills, and contributes to their overall academic and professional success. Students can have a clear path for acquiring the required knowledge, skills, and attitudes for one program by ensuring coherence and consistency between program-level outcomes, industry standards and course outcomes, module learning objectives. Instructors can create a structured and transparent learning environment that supports student success by ensuring coherence and consistency between learning objectives, assessments, and learning activities.

3.1.1 What is Course Alignment?

As shown in Figure 3-1, there are three levels of course alignment. At the first level, course outcomes need to be in good alignment with some program-level outcomes. At the second level, module learning objectives need to align well with course outcomes and make sure all course outcomes are addressed in those modules. At the third level, module learning objectives should align well with assessments, learning resources, and learning activities within a course. Instructors can provide effective learning experiences by aligning courses at these three levels, helping students master essential knowledge, skills, and attitudes for graduation and future employment in their chosen field.

Figure 3-1

Course Alignment

The First-level Course Alignment

For instructors, knowing clearly how their courses align with program-level outcomes helps them better understand why those courses should be taught. Alignment between course outcomes and program-level outcomes encourages a cohesive approach to curriculum design, where different courses are intentionally structured to support different program-level outcomes at different levels for one program. This avoids redundancy and gaps in the curriculum, ensuring that students receive a comprehensive education that addresses all necessary aspects of the program. Course alignment between course outcomes and program-level outcomes promotes the integration of student learning across different courses within a program. Students can make connections between different areas of study covered in different courses, which enhances their overall understanding and prepares them for real-world applications of their knowledge.

Program-level outcomes. Program-level outcomes state what students will be able to do, know, and value upon their completion of one program. Program-level outcomes provide the foundation for course and module objectives. These outcomes should be aligned with the mission and goals of the institution, as well as industry standards and accreditation requirements. Program-level outcomes are the end learning outcomes required for students to successfully graduate and secure a job in a certain field. Such a job can be a tenured-track faculty member, a teaching faculty member, or a staff member at higher education institutions. A job can be with a company, a non-profit organization, or a military organization. In some programs, program-level outcomes are aligned with industry standards that are created by accreditation body, professional associations, employers, industry partner, government agencies, or regulations. Instructors for a course can locate program-level outcomes on their program page or ask their department chair or program coordinator to provide program-level outcomes.

Course outcomes. Course outcomes state what students will be able to do, know, and value upon their completion of one course. These outcomes are often identified when courses are first offered. When developing a new course, the first thing that instructors need to do is to identify reasonable and measurable course outcomes. For an existing course, instructors often need to revisit and revise existing course outcomes to make sure course outcomes are measurable and current for the semester when the course is to be taught. It is common for new topics, trends, or technologies to be added to an existing course. Meanwhile, they need to consider whether to reduce or increase the number of course outcomes to ensure that reasonable course outcomes are covered in one semester.

The Second-level Course Alignment

Many accreditation bodies require instructors provide evidence of course alignment between course outcomes and module learning objectives. The second-level alignment ensure that all the modules covered in a course work together to help student achieve required course outcomes, reducing confusion and overlaps. In other words, different modules are designed to address one or more course outcomes at different levels. Also, it ensures that module learning objectives build towards course outcomes, thus supporting student’s development of required knowledge and skills in a reasonable sequence.

Module learning objectives. Please note that some instructors might organize their course into weeks or units. In this chapter, I consider the course to be organized into modules by default to coherently convey the information covered in this chapter. A module can last one week or more weeks. Module learning objectives state what students will be able to do, know, and value upon their completion of one module. Learning objectives serve as the foundation for aligning assessments and learning activities with course outcomes and program-level outcomes. The revised Bloom’s taxonomy framework is often used to guide instructors to create module learning objectives (Reilley, 2023, March 21).

The Third-Level Course Alignment

Level 3 course alignment refers to the alignment between module learning objectives and learning activities, assessments, learning technologies, and learning resources. Module learning objectives provide a framework for assessing student progress and evaluating their mastery of course content. Instructors can design effective assessments that accurately measure student achievement of stated module learning objectives and provide meaningful feedback. They can design diverse types of learning activities and include various types of resources to help students acquire each learning objective in one module.This approach ensures that all elements of the course are aligned, contributing to a coherent and cohesive learning experience. 

3.1.2 The Importance of Course Alignment

Supports Accreditation and Quality AssuranceMany educational institutions are subject to accreditation requirements and quality assurance standards that emphasize the importance of alignment. Ensuring that course alignment at all levels demonstrates a commitment to educational excellence and helps institutions maintain accreditation.

Prepare Students for Their Future Career

The course alignment between course outcomes and program-level outcomes can create a clear pathway for student learning and academic achievement during their program study. Students understand the purpose and direction of their learning. By ensuring that program-level outcomes are closely connected to industry standards and expectations, students graduate with the knowledge and skills necessary to excel in the workforce. They can see how the material they are studying at any given moment connects to larger goals and how it will benefit them in the long run. In summary, if courses are in alignment with program-level outcomes and even industry standards, students who graduate from one program would develop the competencies needed to succeed in their chosen careers.

Supports Curricular Coherence

Alignment ensures that the learning goals at each level of the curriculum—program, course, and module—are consistent and build upon each other. This consistency helps create a logical progression in the student’s learning journey, allowing them to gradually develop the knowledge and skills necessary to meet the program-level outcomes. To be specific, the alignment between course outcomes and program-level outcomes can ensure the overall coherence and consistency of a program, while alignment between course outcomes and module learning objectives can ensure the overall coherence and consistency of one course. When all the courses offered in one program are aligned well and clearly with program-level outcomes, students can progress seamlessly from one course to the next, building upon what they have learned in a logical and structured manner. When all the module learning objectives are in alignment with course outcomes, students can acquire the required knowledge, skills, and attitudes in a reasonable sequence, building upon what they have learned in a logical and structured matter.

Ensure Teaching Effectiveness

The course alignment between module learning objectives and learning activities, assessments, and resources can ensure teaching effectiveness. How do we often measure teaching effectiveness? In practice, we often measure teaching effectiveness by checking students’ academic performance in terms of final grades and reviewing student evaluations at the end of the semester. When the course alignment between those course elements is ensured, students will be able to achieve learning objectives through engaging in meaningful learning activities, completing assessments, and interacting with learning resources.

3.2 Strategies for Achieving Course Alignment

Achieving course alignment between program-level outcomes, course outcomes, and module learning objectives is a complex and multi-step process that involves careful planning, collaboration, and ongoing assessment. Ensuring this alignment is critical for creating a coherent and effective curriculum that supports student learning and achievement. The following discusses four strategies for achieving course alignment: 1) backward design model, 2) curriculum mapping, 3) collaborative course alignment, and 4) continuous review and improvements.

3.2.1 Backward Design

One effective strategy for achieving course alignment is to apply the backward design model. You can learn more about backward design by watching the video about backward design.

About Backward Design (5:17 mins)

This model emphasizes that one course should be inferred from required learning outcomes also called results instead of required textbooks (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). As shown in Figure 3-2, the backward design model includes three stages: identifying the desired results, determining acceptable evidence, and planning learning experience and instruction. Choices about learning activities, sequences of course modules, and learning resources should be effectively determined only after desired learning outcomes and assessments are identified.

Stage 1: Identify the Desired Results

Stage 1 is important because it sets the foundation for the next two stages. Desired results refer to course outcomes for one course. When design a new course, the first thing for instructors is to identify reasonable number of course outcomes which should be measurable and appropriate for a course level.

Stage 2: Determine Acceptable Evidence

In this stage, instructors are encouraged to think like an assessor before working on lecture videos or readings. They can determine acceptable evidence in terms of assessment methods for their course. There are various types of assessment methods such as quizzes, assignments, and projects. These assessment methods can be used to evaluate whether students achieve required course outcomes and module learning objectives.

Stage 3: Plan Learning Experience and Instruction

According to Wiggins and McTighe (2005), In this stage, instructors often need to consider the following questions at this stage. What learning activities in each module should be included to help students achieve module learning objectives? By engaging in different learning activities, students have different learning experiences with different levels of support from instructors. Learning activities include, but not are limited to lectures in terms of lecture videos or class sessions, discussions, peer review, exploring online resources, and reading textbooks. What will need to be taught and coached? This question addresses module topics, knowledge, skills, and attitudes that will be needed to be covered in each module. What learning resources should be provided to help students achieve module learning objectives? Learning resources can be provided in different formats, including but not limited to lecture slides, lecture videos, YouTude videos, audios, articles, open educational resources (OERs), resources generated by GenAI such as ChatGPT and Claude, and other online resources.

3.2.2 Curriculum Mapping

Curriculum mapping often involves creating a visual representation or matrix that maps the three-level course alignment. The curriculum mapping process helps identify gaps, redundancies, or misalignments, allowing for adjustments to be made accordingly. Based on a Table 3-1 was adapted from Table 2 tilted “highlights of common ground as well as differences found between departments that participated in the curriculum mapping process” (Rawle et al., 2017, p.79).

Table 3-1

Similarities and differences between departments engaging in curriculum mapping process

As shown in Table 3-2, we could map the first-level course alignment in a matrix table in which we align courses offered in one program with program-level outcomes. Please note that Table 3-2 is one template for a matrix table without specific program-level outcomes or course outcomes. This will make it easy for instructors from different disciplines to adopt this table when doing curriculum mapping for their courses. 

In Table 3-2, each required course is linked with at least one Program Learning Outcome (PLO) and at one level indicated by the number in the relevant cell. 1= Introducing  2= Broadening  3= Fulfilling

Levels: Levels are determined based on Bloom’s Taxonomy or Webb’s DOK cognitive learning behaviors.

1= Introducing – (gain knowledge, comprehend information) student is not familiar with content or skill. Instruction concentrates on introducing students to the content or skill. The student should have basic content or skill of the course. Instruction concentrates on enhancing content/strengthening skill and adding new content material building more complex skills based on entrance competency.

2= Broadening – Student brings reasonable knowledge/content/skill/ competency as a result of content or skill being taught and emphasized at some previous point in the education program. Instructional activity continues to teach and build upon previous content/skill and reinforces content/skill competency.

3= Fulfilling – Student has knowledge/content skill/competency as a result of content or skill being taught and emphasized at some previous point in the education program. The assessment applies a previously taught and emphasized content or skill.

Note:  Each department has a unique terminology to define level or outcome scale for example instead 3-level scale, your program might have 4-level scale. Please check with your department or program coordinator to have some clarification on expectation of the each scale before beginning your curriculum mapping.

Table 3-2

Course Alignment between Courses and PLOs

Curriculum mapping on course level means that we should align course outcomes with program-level outcomes and then align course outcomes with learning objectives, learning activities, learning resources, and assessments. A course blueprint template often includes the two matrix tables as shown in Table 3-3 and Table 3-4. To make it easier, the course blueprint could include the statements as shown the following example and Table 3-4. As show in Table 3-3, each course outcome should be aligned with at least one program-level outcome by placing the letter X in the appropriate cell. Please note that Table 3-3 is one template for a matrix table without specific program-level outcomes or course outcomes. This will make it easy for instructors from different disciplines to adopt Table 3-3 when doing curriculum mapping for their courses. 

Table 3-3

Course Alignment between COs and PLOs

Table 3-4 shows how module learning objectives align with course outcomes, learning activities, assessments, and resources for one weekly module. The following is an example blueprint for one training workshop aiming at helping instructors do course design with OSCQR and RSI which has been thoroughly discussed in Chapter 2. The example is provided to help instructors better understand how to conduct the second-level and third-level course alignment. In standard instructional design practice, instructors typically dedicate about one month to complete the task: completing two levels of course alignment for the whole course. This task, though tedious, is valuable. After completing the course alignment using a matrix table like Table 3-4, instructors gain a clear picture of their course.

Table 3-4

Curriculum Mapping on the Course Level 

3.2.3 Collaborative Course Alignment

Course alignment might involve multiple stakeholders, such as department chairs, instructional designers, and instructors. Collaborative course alignment could enhance alignment because collaborative efforts could ensure that learning objectives, assessments, and learning activities are scrutinized from various perspectives and aligned with program-level outcomes and industry standards. Since department chairs are familiar with program-level outcomes, they know clearly which courses should address what program-level outcomes to what extent.

3.2.4 Continuous Review and Improvement

Course alignment is not a one-time process; it requires ongoing review and improvement. Instructors, program coordinators, and department chairs might need to regularly assess the effectiveness, currency, and relativeness of program-level outcomes, course outcomes, and module earning objectives. Thus, they will be able to make data-driven decisions on whether to redesign some existing courses, delete some, or design new courses. On the course level, faculty might as well regularly evaluate the effectiveness of their courses by analyzing student performance data, gathering feedback, and making necessary adjustments to maintain alignment and ensure continuous improvement.

3.3 An Comprehensive Approach for Conducting Course Alignment

The following describes a 6-step comprehensive approach for conducting course alignment. The concepts in each step have been already discussed in this chapter.

3.3.1 Defining Program-Level Outcomes

Course alignment begins by clearly defining the program-level outcomes, which should be aligned with the mission and goals of the institution, as well as industry standards and accreditation requirements. Instructors can locate program-level outcomes on their program page or ask their program coordinator or department chair about program-level outcomes. If there are no program-level outcomes, they could work with their colleagues and program coordinator or department chair to define new ones.

3.3.2 Developing Course Outcomes

Courses within the program should be designed to help students achieve those program-level outcomes. Measurable course outcomes should be developed so that instructors can accurately assess these outcomes during the process, while students can have a clear understanding of what is expected of them. Measurable course outcomes will be discussed in detail in the later section titled Measurable Course Outcomes in this chapter. The number of course outcomes should be reasonable so that it’s possible for all prospective students to succeed in this course. Instructors could aim to have about 3-6 course outcomes. The difficulty of course outcomes should match course levels. For an undergraduate course, we might expect students to apply basic concepts in real-world situations by the end of the semester. For a graduate course, we might expect students to be able to create a comprehensive action research proposal by the end of the semester. Additionally, different graduate courses or undergraduate courses might align with program learning outcomes at different levels. One course could be at the level of introducing, broadening, while another course could be at the level of broadening and fulfilling. Oftentimes, a course at the level of introducing would be a prerequisite for other courses in one graduate program.

3.3.3. Identifying Module Learning Objectives

Within each course, module learning objectives should be identified for each module. In real-world situations, modules might be determined by a required textbook or the previous instructor for one course. In this situation, the instructor needs to create new learning objectives for each module or revise existing ones to provide a comprehensive list of learning objectives to address all the knowledge, skills, or attitudes that students should achieve by the end of one module. These learning objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART). SMART learning objectives will be discussed in detail in the later section titled SMART Learning Objectives in this chapter. Each learning objective should align with one or more course outcomes and contribute to their achievement. Each learning objective is supposed to represent one specific learning task or single cognitive process such as creating. Therefore, we suggest including only one action verb in each learning objective to maintain clarity and focus.

3.3.4. Conducting Curriculum Mapping

Curriculum mapping is conducted at the program and course level using a table format as shown in the previous section or a concept mapping tool. A matrix table at the program level could map how different courses are linked with different program-level outcomes at different levels, which helps identify areas of strength and gaps in one program. A matrix table at the course level could map how learning objectives support course outcomes and how learning activities, learning resources, and assessments support students’ achievement of module learning objectives. Instructors can provide learning activities such as online discussions and peer review and assessments such as exams and projects. Chapter 4 will discuss how to create diverse learning activities and assessments in detail.

3.3.5. Incorporating Feedback Loops

Feedback loops at each level of curriculum mapping should be incorporated to monitor and adjust alignment as needed. Instructors could collect feedback from students, colleagues, program coordinators, department chair, and other stakeholders to assess the effectiveness of the curriculum and identify areas for improvement. Collaborating with these stakeholders would help ensure that learning objectives and outcomes are consistent across courses and programs. For instance, feedback from students could help faculty identify whether some activities support students’ achievement of learning objectives. Feedback from colleagues and department chair could help faculty identify whether their courses are well aligned with program-level outcomes. The feedback loops could ensure instructors to continuously improve course alignment.

3.3.6. Conducting Regular Reviews and Updates

It’s advisable to periodically review the curriculum and alignment matrix to ensure it remains current and effective. Nowadays, technology advances fast so that there might be new practices, developments, and trends in each discipline. Instructors should update course outcomes and learning objectives as needed to reflect changes in industry standards, accreditation requirements, and educational best practices.

3.5 Measurable Course Outcomes

Section 3.5. shares six tips for writing effective and measurable course outcomes. Writing measurable course outcomes is a crucial aspect of effective course design and teaching. Measurable course outcomes define what knowledge, skills, and attitudes students should be able to acquire by the end of a course. Course outcomes provide a foundation for identifying module learning objectives, then developing learning activities, assessments, and learning activities.

3.5.1 Best Practices for Developing Course Outcomes (COs)

The graduate school at FHSU provides best practices for graduate courses. Regarding measurable course outcomes, this document provides the following suggestions:

• COs are clear and measurable outcomes of learning.
• COs are aligned to course assignments.
• COs align with the mission of the program, that is, program-level outcomes

Just to note, course outcomes also need to reflect industry standards accreditation requirements.

Using action verbs can specify observable knowledge or skills that can be measurable. Use action verbs and includes higher order and critical thinking skills (Bloom’s Taxonomy Levels – Analyzing, Evaluating, Creating; Webb’s DOK – Strategic Thinking, Extended thinking).

3.5.2 Communicating Clear and Concise Course Outcomes

Outcomes should be written from the perspective of the students. It’s advisable to write course outcomes in clear and concise language to avoid ambiguity. Use simple sentence structures and avoid jargon or overly technical language that may be confusing to students. Clear course outcomes should be presented to students on Day 1 so that students know clearly what is expected of them and how their learning will be assessed. Instructors might as well include course outcomes in the course syllabus and discuss them in a course overview videos or course overview in paragraphs.

3.5.3 Specify Conditions

Course outcomes should be specific. Where applicable, specify the conditions under which students will demonstrate each course outcome (e.g., “given a set of data” or “given a scenario”).

3.5.4 Aligning with Assessments and Learning Activities

Ensure that course outcomes are aligned with assessments and learning activities. Each outcome should have corresponding assessments that measure student performance and learning activities that support the achievement of the outcome. In regular course design practices, assessments and learning activities are often directly aligned with module learning objectives, which each learning objective aligns with one course outcome.

3.5.5 Consider Different Domains of Learning

Course outcomes may encompass cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains of learning. Cognitive course outcomes should be included in all the courses. Cognitive outcomes relate to knowledge and intellectual skills, affective outcomes relate to attitudes and values, and psychomotor outcomes relate to physical skills. Ensure that outcomes address the appropriate domains for the course content.

3.5.6 Continuous Revision

It’s advisable to regularly review and revise course outcomes based on feedback from students, assessment data, and changes in industry standards or educational practices. Instructors could review their course outcomes and make necessary revision every semester. Continuous improvement ensures that course outcomes remain current and effective.

3.6 SMART Learning Objectives

Writing SMART module learning objectives is an essential skill for instructors when designing courses that facilitate effective learning and assessment. SMART learning objectives are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound goals that guide the teaching and learning process. These objectives provide students with clear expectations and a sense of direction. The following provides best practice for writing smart module learning objectives.

3.6.1 Understanding SMART Criteria

Specific

Learning objectives should clearly describe what knowledge, skills, or attitudes students will obtain in precise, unambiguous terms. Learning objectives should be written from the students’ perspectives so that students won’t be confused. To communicate specific learning objectives clearly to learners, we suggest there should be only one action verb in each learning objective.

Measurable

Learning objectives should be quantifiable, allowing instructors to assess whether students have achieved the learning objectives by the end of a module. Measurable learning objectives should use action verbs. Instructors often like to use the verb “understand” because that’s the verb is widely mentioned when talking about learning. But how do we measure student’s understanding of a concept? We often measure student’s understanding by asking them to explain a concept in a quiz or an essay. So, we suggest instructors could consider using “explain to replace “understand” in most learning objectives. To develop measurable learning objectives, instructors should use action verbs from Bloom’s revised Taxonomy, such as “analyze,” “synthesize,” “evaluate,” “create,” “demonstrate,” and “apply,” to describe the expected level of cognitive, affective, or psychomotor learning. Reilley (March 21, 2023)’s blog discussed in detail how to use the revised Bloom’s Taxonomy as a framework for writing learning objectives. The TILT department provides guidance on how to create learning objectives based on Bloom’s Taxonomy in detail. Readers can view the colored version and black-white version of the guidance as follows.

TILT-Blooms-Color

TILT-Blooms-BW

Achievable

Each module learning objective should be realistic and attainable given the students’ abilities, prior knowledge, background, readiness, available resources, the course level, and the time frame available. For instance, one learning objective for Module 1 is often simpler than one learning objective in Module 8 since students need time to build up their knowledge and skills throughout a semester. Most of the time, students might be expected to explain a concept in their own words in Module 1. In comparison, students might be expected to apply the concept in a real-world scenario. The cognitive level involved in one learning objective in one undergraduate course should be lower than that in one graduate course.

Relevant

As is addressed earlier in the section about course alignment, objectives should align with course outcomes and program-level outcomes. Also, learning objectives are expected to be written from the students’ perspectives so that students can feel related. Besides, learning objectives should be well aligned with learning activities and assessments. When creating learning objectives, instructors might as well think about what learning activities should be included to support student’s mastery of learning objectives and what assessments should be included to measure whether student achieve those learning objectives.

Time-bound

Module learning objectives refer to when the expected learning should take place, that is, one module. Sometimes, one module could last one week or more weeks. So, instructors should state clearly the date range of one module.

3.6.2 Set Measurable Criteria

It’s important to set measurable criteria in one learning objective. Instructors could consider the standards for performance, quality, quantity, or accuracy. These criteria provide a basis for assessment and feedback. However, the criterion in some learning objectives can implied by correctly or successfully because there is no need to specify the quality and quantity.

3.6.3 The Reasonable Number of Module Learning Objectives

Regarding the number of learning objectives for each module, instructors could aim for 3-8 learning objectives. If there are less than 3 learning objectives for one module, faculty might consider combining this module with another one. If there are more than 8 learning objectives, they might consider breaking down this module into two. Of course, there might be discipline differences regarding the reasonable number of learning objectives for each module. If instructors think there are too many learning objectives in one module, they could consider breaking down one module into two.

3.6.3 Tools for Creating Learning Objectives

The following lists several tools that are specifically designed for creating learning objectives.

ASU Objectives Builder Tool

UCF Objectives Builder Tool

Learning objective easy generator

Learning outcome generator

Generative AI tools for Writing Learning Objectives

We suggest instructors could use ChatGPT or Claude.AI. The following example shows module learning objectives respectively generated by ChatGPT and Claude.AI with using the same prompt.

3.6.4 Additional Resources

Clear guide to write learning objectives

The quick guide is a simple one to help instructors create learning objectives. Clear guide to write learning objectives

Examples of SMART Learning Objectives Generated by ChatGPT

The following presents three examples of SMART learning objectives generated by ChatGPT.

In conclusion, the process of writing SMART module learning objectives helps instructors clarify what they expect students to be able to do and know by the end of one module. For one part, learning objectives are often used to guide instructors to design learning activities and assessments in one module. For the other part, these objectives provide a roadmap for student learning and achievement.

References

Rawle, F., Bowen, T., Murck, B., & Hong, R. (2017). Curriculum mapping across the disciplines: differences, approaches, and strategies. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 10, 75-88.

Reilley, D. (2023, March 21). The revised bloom’s taxonomy as a framework for writing leaning objectives. Tiger Learn Blog. Retrieved April 19, 2024 from https://tigerlearn.fhsu.edu/the-revised-blooms-taxonomy-as-a-framework-for-writing-learning-objectives/

Accounting Curriculum (n.d.). Bachelor of Business Administration Degree with a Major in Accounting. Retrieved July 25, 2024 from https://www.fhsu.edu/efa/accounting/Accounting-Curriculum/ 

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Backward Design. In Understanding by Design (pp. 13-34). ASCD.