3.1 Program Outcomes

Program outcomes state what students will be able to do, know, and value upon their completion of their program. Program outcomes are the learning outcomes required for students to graduate and succeed in their fields.These outcomes should be aligned with the mission and goals of the institution. Where relevant, program outcomes are aligned with industry standards created by accreditation bodies, professional associations, employers, industry partners, or government agencies. You can access program-level outcomes on your program’s webpage or ask your department chair or program coordinator where to access them.

3.2 Course Outcomes

Course outcomes define what students should be able to do, know, and value upon completing a course. They serve as a foundation for developing module learning objectives, instructional activities, and assessments. Outcomes should be identified when a course is first developed and revisited periodically to ensure they remain measurable and relevant. As new topics, trends, or technologies emerge, course outcomes may need updating.

3.2.1. Developing Course Outcomes

Course outcomes should be measurable to facilitate assessment and provide students with clear expectations. A reasonable number of outcomes—typically 3 to 6—ensures students have a fair opportunity to succeed. Outcome difficulty should match the course level: Undergraduate courses may require students to apply basic concepts in real-world contexts, while graduate courses may involve creating comprehensive research proposals. Courses may also align with program learning outcomes at different levels. Some courses introduce foundational concepts, while others expand and fulfill advanced competencies. Introductory-level courses often serve as prerequisites for more advanced coursework.

The graduate school at FHSU provides best practices for developing measurable course outcomes, including:

• COs should be clear and measurable statements of learning.

• COs should be aligned with course assignments to ensure they can be assessed.

• COs should reflect program-level outcomes and support the program’s mission.

• COs should consider industry standards and accreditation requirements where applicable.

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.

Ensure Course Outcomes Are Clear and Concise

Course outcomes should be written from the student’s perspective in clear, concise language to avoid ambiguity. Simple sentence structures and the avoidance of jargon help students understand expectations.

To reinforce clarity, instructors should:

• Present course outcomes on Day 1 so students understand expectations.

• Include course outcomes in the syllabus and other key course documents.

• Discuss outcomes in a course overview video or introductory materials.

Ensure Course Outcomes Are Measurable

Writing measurable course outcomes is a crucial aspect of effective course design.  To ensure measurability, use action verbs that specify observable knowledge or skills. Higher-order thinking skills, such as analyzing, evaluating, and creating (Bloom’s Taxonomy) or strategic and extended thinking (Webb’s Depth of Knowledge), help clarify learning expectations. Where applicable, course outcomes should specify conditions under which students will demonstrate their learning.

For example:

• “Given a set of data, students will analyze trends and draw conclusions.”

• “Given a real-world scenario, students will design a strategic plan.”

Clearly stating conditions will help you create aligned assessments and ensure your students understand how their learning will be evaluated.

3.2.2 Revising Course Outcomes

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.

3.3 Module Learning Objectives

Instructors might organize their courses into weeks, modules, or units. Examples in this chapter assume a module organization. Module learning objectives define what students will be able to do, know, or value upon completing a module. These objectives serve as the foundation for assessments, learning activities, and course alignment. When designing module learning objectives, instructors can use Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy to ensure they address different cognitive levels (Reilley, 2023). They can also utilize a number of tools, such as the SMART framework and GenAI platforms.

3.3.1 Writing Learning Objectives

Within each course, module learning objectives should be clearly identified for each module. In some cases, the structure of a module may be dictated by a required textbook or by a previous instructor’s course design. When this happens, instructors can create new learning objectives or revise existing ones to ensure a comprehensive, structured approach to student learning.

A reasonable number of learning objectives per module is 3–8. Fewer than 3? Consider merging with another module. More than 8? Consider splitting into multiple modules. Disciplinary differences may apply, but keeping objectives manageable ensures clarity and focus.

Each learning objective should:

• Align with one or more course outcomes to contribute to broader student competencies.

• Represent one specific learning task or cognitive process (e.g., creating, analyzing).

• Include only one action verb to maintain clarity and focus.

Setting Measurable Criteria

Setting measurable criteria helps define performance standards and improve assessment clarity. Criteria can be based on:

• Performance (e.g., solve 80% of problems correctly)

• Quality (e.g., provide a well-supported thesis)

• Accuracy (e.g., diagnose case studies with 90% precision)

In some cases, criteria may be implied.
Example: “By the end of this module, students will correctly explain leadership concepts in their own words.”

3.3.2 Using the SMART Framework

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 – Clearly define the skill or knowledge students will acquire.

• Measurable – Use observable criteria to assess student progress.

• Achievable – Set realistic expectations for students within the module timeframe.

• Relevant – Ensure alignment with course and program outcomes.

• Time-Bound – Define when the objective should be achieved (e.g., by the end of the module).

Specific

Learning objectives should clearly describe the knowledge, skills, or attitudes students will acquire in precise, unambiguous terms. Writing objectives from the student’s perspective help ensure clarity. To maintain focus, each learning objective should contain only one action verb that defines the specific learning task.

Measurable

Learning objectives must be quantifiable, allowing instructors to assess whether students have achieved them by the end of a module.

• Objectives should use action verbs rather than vague terms like understand. For example, instead of “students will understand leadership”, use “students will explain leadership concepts in their own words”.

• Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy provides a framework for measurable learning objectives, with action verbs such as:

  • Analyze

  • Synthesize

  • Evaluate

  • Create

  • Demonstrate

  • Apply

Reilley (2023) provides a detailed guide on using Bloom’s Taxonomy for writing effective learning objectives.

Achievable

Objectives should be realistic and attainable within the module’s timeframe, considering students’ prior knowledge, course level, and available resources. Early modules often focus on lower-level cognitive skills (explaining concepts in their own words), while later modules require higher-level application (applying concepts to real-world scenarios). In graduate-level courses, students are typically expected to perform more complex analyses than in undergraduate courses.

Relevant

Objectives should be meaningful to students and align with, Course Outcomes and Program Learning Goals, industry standards and accreditation requirements, and learning activities and assessments. When writing learning objectives, instructors should consider:

• What learning activities will support mastery of the objective?

• How will assessments measure whether students achieve the objective?

Time-Bound

Learning objectives should specify when learning is expected to occur, typically within a module (which may last one or more weeks). Instructors should:

• Clearly define the timeframe for achieving each objective.

• Ensure that objectives are sequenced logically across modules.

For example, an objective stating “By the end of Module 3, students will analyze case studies on supply chain logistics” provides a clear deadline for mastery. By following the SMART framework, instructors create clear, measurable, and aligned learning objectives. Well-structured objectives improve student engagement and ensure meaningful assessment.

3.3.3 AI and Other Resources for Writing Learning Objectives

You can also utilize ChatGPT or Claude.AI to write your learning objectives.The following example shows module learning objectives respectively generated by ChatGPT and Claude.AI with using the same prompt.

There are also several tools and guides available to help you write effective objectives:

• ASU Objectives Builder Tool

• UCF Objectives Builder Tool

• Clear guide to write learning objectives
  

3.4 Aligning Program Outcomes, Course Outcomes, & Learning Objectives

Alignment underpins effective teaching and learning and helps to ensure coherence between program outcomes, course outcomes, module learning objectives, learning activities, and assessments. Alignment designs a clear path for students to acquire the required knowledge, skills, and attitudes for their program. It also provides instructors a framework for creating a structured, transparent learning environment that supports student success.

What is Course Alignment?

As shown in Figure 3-1, there are three levels of course alignment. At the first level, course outcomes must align with some program outcomes. At the second level, module learning objectives need to align with course outcomes and the instructor needs to ensure that all course outcomes are addressed. At the third level, the course assessments, learning resources, and learning activities align with module learning objectives. 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.

Figure 3-1

Course Alignment

First-Level Course Alignment

Alignment between course and program outcomes facilitates a cohesive approach, where different courses are structured to support program-level outcomes. This prevents redundancy and gaps in curriculum, ensuring students learn all necessary aspects of the program. Alignment between course and program outcomes also promotes the integration of student learning across courses; students can make connections between different areas of study covered in different courses, enhancing their understanding and preparing them for real-world applications of their knowledge.

Second-Level Course Alignment

Many accreditation bodies require instructors to provide evidence of alignment between course outcomes and module learning objectives. Second-level alignment ensures that the modules covered in a course work together to help students achieve required course outcomes and required knowledge and skills in a reasonable sequence.

Third-Level Course Alignment

Third-level course alignment refers to the alignment between module learning objectives and learning activities, assessments, learning technologies, and learning resources. By designing assessments that accurately measure your students’ achievement of module learning objectives and providing meaningful feedback, you can assess your students’ progress and evaluate their mastery of course content. Your learning activities, technologies, and resources should help students meet module learning objectives.

3.4.1 Strategies for Achieving Course Alignment

Aligning program-level outcomes, course outcomes, and module learning objectives involves planning, collaboration, and ongoing assessment. The following section discusses four strategies for achieving course alignment: 1) Backward Design Model, 2) curriculum mapping, 3) collaborative course alignment, and 4) continuous review and improvement.

Backward Design

One effective course alignment strategy involves applying the Backward Design Model. You can learn more about Backward Design in the video below.

About Backward Design (5:17 mins)

This model emphasizes building your course from the point of learning outcomes, rather than textbook chapters (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). As shown in Figure 3-2, the Backward Design Model includes three stages: identifying the desired results (outcomes), determining acceptable evidence (assessments), and planning learning experience and instruction to help students meet outcomes as demonstrated in assessment. You should determine your course module sequencing and learning resources only after you have identified your desired learning outcomes and the assessments you will use to measure achievement.

Stage 1: Identify the Desired Results

Stage 1 sets the foundation for the next two stages. Here, “desired results” refer to course outcomes. When designing a new course, you first identify a 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. You can determine acceptable evidence of meeting course outcomes and which assessment methods will demonstrate meeting these outcomes. Assessment methods include quizzes and tests, assignments, and projects.

Stage 3: Plan Learning Experience and Instruction

At this stage, instructors need to consider the following questions (Wiggins and McTighe, 2005):

• What learning activities should be included to help students achieve module learning objectives?
  These include attending lectures, participating in discussions and peer review, exploring online resources, and reading textbooks and other materials.
• What will need to be taught and coached?
  This question addresses module topics, knowledge, skills, and attitudes that should be addressed in each module.
• What resources should be provided to help students achieve module learning objectives?
  Learning resources include lecture slides and videos, YouTube videos, audio recordings, articles, open educational resources (OERs), and AI-generated resources.

Curriculum Mapping

Curriculum mapping is the process of visually representing how courses align within a degree or certificate program. It helps departments identify gaps, redundancies, and misalignments. Table 3-1 illustrates how motivations for curriculum mapping can differ across departments, adapted from Rawle et al. (2017).

Curriculum maps can be created at both the program and course levels, using either table formats or concept mapping tools. At the program level, a matrix can show how courses support program-level outcomes at varying levels of mastery. At the course level, a matrix can illustrate how module learning objectives align with course outcomes and how learning activities, resources, and assessments support student achievement. Instructors might use learning activities such as discussions, peer reviews, exams, or projects. Chapter 4 explores the design of learning activities and assessments in more depth.

Table 3-1

Similarities and differences between departments engaging in curriculum mapping process

As shown in Table 3-2, we could map first-level course alignment in a matrix table in which we align courses with program outcomes. Please note that Table 3-2 is uses generic, incomplete course and programs. This will make it easy for instructors from different disciplines to adopt this table when doing curriculum mapping for their courses. 

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) The student has foundational knowledge needed for the course, but is unfamiliar with the particular skill addressed in this outcome. Instruction concentrates on introducing students to the content or skill, enhancing content/strengthening skill, and adding new content to build more complex skills.

2= Broadening – Student brings reasonable knowledge/content/skill/competency as a result of content or skill taught at some previous point in the program. Instructional activity builds 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 emphasized at some previous point in the program. The assessment addresses a previously taught and emphasized content or skill.

Note:  Each department has a unique terminology to define level or outcome scale. Check with your department chair or program coordinator for clarification on your scale before beginning your curriculum mapping.

Table 3-2

Course Alignment between Courses and POs

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 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 POs

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 

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.

Continuous Review and Improvement

Course alignment requires ongoing review and improvement. Instructors, program coordinators, and department chairs need to regularly assess the effectiveness, currency, and relativeness of program outcomes, course outcomes, and module earning objectives. On the course level, faculty should 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.

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.

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.

3.4.4 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.

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.