Evidencing learning outcomes: a multi-level, multi-dimensional course alignment model

This conceptual framework proposes a multi-level, multi-dimensional course alignment model to implement a contextualised constructive alignment of rubric design that authentically evidences and assesses learning outcomes. By embedding quality control mechanisms at each level for each dimension, this model facilitates the development of an aligned curriculum. The use of rubrics is a crucial theme for many higher education institutions owing to the binding requirement by universities to provide evidence to quality assurance agencies. The success of evidencing learning outcomes through rubrics, however, is only one piece of the puzzle. The other is the contextualised constructive alignment of intertwined factors. Despite the significance of embedding these factors, there has been little, if any, systematic framework in this area. The two key instrumental forces underpinning the conception of this model are: seeking external accreditation and the implementation of programme enhancement thus realising the strategic agenda for an Australian university.

[1]  David Scott,et al.  Reviewing and reforming a traditional engineering course , 2005 .

[2]  D. Royce Sadler,et al.  Indeterminacy in the use of preset criteria for assessment and grading , 2009 .

[3]  Matthew Riddle,et al.  Curriculum mapping to embed graduate capabilities , 2012 .

[4]  J. Biggs,et al.  Teaching for Quality Learning , 2007 .

[5]  P. Goodyear Psychological foundations for networked learning , 2001 .

[6]  Erica Smith,et al.  Quality and Qualms in the Marking of University Assignments by Sessional Staff: An Exploratory Study , 2006 .

[7]  Beverley Oliver,et al.  Graduate attributes as a focus for institution-wide curriculum renewal: innovations and challenges , 2013 .

[8]  H. Andrade Teaching With Rubrics: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly , 2005 .

[9]  Emma J. Stodel,et al.  The demand-driven learning model: A framework for Web-based learning , 2001, Internet High. Educ..

[10]  Robert Sommer,et al.  Experience and Education. , 1974 .

[11]  James O. Carey,et al.  The systematic design of instruction , 1978 .

[12]  Anna Jones There is nothing generic about graduate attributes: unpacking the scope of context , 2013 .

[13]  Susan M. Brookhart,et al.  How to Create and Use Rubrics for Formative Assessment and Grading , 2013 .

[14]  J. Biggs,et al.  Teaching For Quality Learning At University , 1999 .

[15]  Ron Basu,et al.  Six-Sigma to operational excellence: role of tools and techniques , 2004 .

[16]  Moira Cordiner,et al.  Levelling expectations across different years in an undergraduate degree to support work-related learning : evidence for a multi-pronged approach. , 2007 .

[17]  Andrew Litchfield,et al.  Contextualising and integrating into the curriculum the learning and teaching of work‐ready professional graduate attributes , 2010 .

[18]  G. Boulton‐Lewis Teaching for quality learning at university , 2008 .

[19]  L. S. Vygotskiĭ,et al.  Mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes , 1978 .

[20]  Robert G. Berns,et al.  Contextual Teaching and Learning: Preparing Students for the New Economy. The Highlight Zone: Research @ Work No. 5. , 2001 .