When reflecting on learning outcomes in art and design higher education, I can see both pros and cons to their use.
It does sometimes feel like LOs might be shutting down students’ potential, however, I find the majority of students need and want clear boundaries, and LOs provide this. It is interesting to reflect on how different this might be for me as a lecturer in UX (where there are some clear technical rights and wrongs) versus a field like fine art, which has the potential to be much more open ended (where LOs might feel much more restrictive).
Addison (2014) reflects that LOs can mean tutors fail to recognise learning other than that intended, and how LOs might shut down alternative routes to an outcome and types of creativity.
Davies (2000) also talks about the challenges of capturing somewhat nebulous concepts like ‘creativity’, ‘imagination’ and ‘originality in LOs:
“How do we construct learning outcomes which capture the nature of these terms? ‘Imagination’, for instance is, to a large extent, experiential — how do we measure someone’s experience of something? How do we know that it has developed?”
Davies (2000)
And later reflects on the challenges of convergent (coming together towards an agreed conclusion) vs divergent (expanding outwards to previous unforeseen conclusions) thinking.
Addison talks later about how LOs can lessen teacher idiosyncrasies, which does feel important. This does also make them somewhat daunting though — as a new tutor, it can be challenging to write LOs in a way which I am certain is technically correct, and which uses the right language and phrasing. It can be difficult to ascertain what is a ‘good’, ‘valid’ learning outcome, vs. what is a whim on my part.
At this stage I prefer to have LOs and assessment criteria provided by others more senior than me, which I then strive to meet in my teaching. Ultimately though, writing LOs is a skill I am developing, as it will be a vital part of my practice as an educator. Expanding my reading (such as the referenced Davies (2000) article) and discussing with fellow lecturers and more senior staff will aid in this.
Addison also reflects on the fact that LOs could impede ‘responsive teaching’ (which they describe as ‘learning moments’) and particularly in relation to arts education, I do believe LOs which are too prescriptive can lessen the role of the teacher as a ‘model citizen’ (or ‘inspiring practitioner’) and reduce us to text book readers.
Overall, I do like a structure and a framework to work to, but I also value flexibility and freedom, so striking a balance is important. When marking, it is stressful when students question your grading — and being able to clearly outline to them why their work has been graded that way means it’s objective and unquestionable. The student experience is one of my key arguments in favour of LOs — in practice, the majority of students in my subject areas do find clearly articulated, sufficiently open ended LOs useful and validating.
References
Addison, N. (2014) ‘Doubting Learning Outcomes in Higher Education Contexts: from Performativity towards Emergence and Negotiation’, International Journal of Art & Design Education, 33(3), pp. 313–325. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12063.
Davies, Allan (2000) Effective Assessment in Art and Design: Writing Learning Outcomes and Assessment Criteria in Art and Design. Project Report. University of the Arts London. Available at: https://ualresearchonline.arts.ac.uk/id/eprint/629/1/cltad_learningoutcomes.pdf