Definition Of Learning Outcomes Research Articles

Engineering Learning Outcomes: The Possible Balance between the Passion and the Profession

What is an engineering student expected to learn to become a competent engineer? Which is most desirable in higher education: hard skills or soft skills? Are there differences between master’s and bachelor’s learning outcomes, or between public or private schools? Previous works point out the relevance of hard rather than soft skills in engineering higher education. The implementation of learning outcomes (LOs) in higher-education curricula has been a common challenge for European educational institutions. Despite the efforts undertaken since the Bologna Declaration, the effective implementation of the learning outcomes paradigm is still in process. This research intends to analyse the LOs proposed in the scope of graduate and postgraduate electrical or computer electrical or computer engineering programs submitted to the Agency for Assessment and Accreditation of Higher Education (A3ES) in Portugal since 2004. Conducting a qualitative analysis, data documents were coded according to the Nusche typology of LOs. The results suggest that cognitive skills are a core dimension in electrical or computer engineering LOs. References to non-cognitive LOs are not representative. Different institution sectors (private vs. public), systems (universities vs. polytechnics), and study cycles (first vs. second vs. integrated master) highlight distinct cognitive and non-cognitive categories in their definition of LOs. The results are discussed in terms of a changing or a recycling paradigm in higher-education practices.

University Learning Outcomes: Statement of the Issue Within the Theory of Ill-Posed Problems

The article discusses the problem of determining the learning outcomes for educational programs of the university, including at the program level and the level of individual disciplines included in the program. The goal is to substantiate the understanding of the definition of learning outcomes at a university as an inverse ill-posed problem within the framework of the theory of ill-posed problems, which will allow further reengineering of the educational process at a university based on models of inverse and ill-posed problems. The article identifies the types of uncertainty inherent in education, which affect the possibility of an incorrect decision. The publication substantiates a new understanding of the educational process focused on learning outcomes at a university, as a process of finding a solution to an inverse incorrect problem. In this case, the learning outcomes formulated for a specific educational program are considered as an available solution to the inverse problem. The research carried out by the authors made it possible to construct a mathematical model of the educational process at the university and identify its components. The authors demonstrate that the optimal way to design the educational process is to design it as an inverse problem, and the list of disciplines, their content and the corresponding learning outcomes are determined and developed at subsequent stages, focusing on the goals of the program.

Analysing the Malaysian Higher Education Training Offer for Furniture Design and Woodworking Industry 4.0 as an Input Towards Joint Curriculum Validation Protocol

An education programme at the master’s level normally aims to facilitate graduates’ acquisition, mastery and application of advanced knowledge in specialised areas of education. However, there is no learning pathway that aims to improve the level of specific and transversal competencies and skills, with particular regard to those relevant for the labour market in the furniture sector, such as management, entrepreneurship, language competences and leadership toward wood and furniture industry 4.0. The methodology for this research inquiry was based upon a survey questionnaire of 54 respondents during the MAKING4.0 Seminar at Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) in Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia. The results were analysed from the Work Package 1 (WP1) “Analysis and comparison of the current Higher Education training offer and furniture and woodworking industry”, before the learning outcomes were defined for each of the identified topics. The definition of learning outcomes was made considering the Recommendations of the European Qualifications Framework (EQF), and subsequently harmonised with the Programme Learning Outcomes defined in the Malaysian Qualification Framework 2nd edition (MQF2.0) for a Master´s Degree Level 7. The identified learning outcomes have been grouped into four modules: (1) Processes and Production of Furniture, (2) Intelligent and Sustainable Design, (3) Wood and New Materials, and (4) Innovation Management. Results of the study indicated that MAKING4.0 is in line with the actions highlighted in the Malaysian Education Blueprint (2015–2025) and the objectives of the Ministry of International Trade and Industry in developing the National Industry 4.0 policy framework. MAKING4.0 aims to ensure an adequate supply of human capital and skills, as well as develop an innovative master’s degree to modernise the current training offer in wood and furniture technology processes and design around Industry 4.0 in Malaysia.

Learning outcomes physiotherapy in neurology – a structured consensus finding of the Austrian University Network Physiotherapy in Neurology (ÖHPN) / Learning Outcomes Physiotherapie in der Neurologie – eine strukturierte Konsensfindung des österreichischen Hochschulnetzwerkes Physiotherapie in der Neurologie (ÖHPN)

Abstract Background European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in tertiary education at Universities of Applied Sciences recommend a high level of competence orientation. This can be achieved and evaluated by the definition of Learning Outcomes. Furthermore, these Outcomes can assure a comparison of the level of education after graduation. Efforts should be made to achieve this form of Quality Assurance for the professional education of physiotherapists. Objective The aim of this paper is to state consensus of the Austrian Universities of Applied Sciences Network for Physiotherapy in Neurology through the definition of shared Learning Outcomes for the field of Neurology for undergraduate physiotherapy students. Methods Based on the guidelines of the European Qualification Framework (EQF), Physio Austria (Austrian Association of Physiotherapists) published the competency profile for physiotherapists describing learning outcomes of EQF levels 6 as the first study cycle with Bachelor degree. Specific learning outcomes for Physiotherapy in Neurology were added for the further development and differentiated assurance of Quality Standards in coordination with experts from the Universities of Applied Sciences in Austria. Results In addition to the Learning Outcomes described in the competency profile of Physio Austria, this consensus paper describes those specifically for the EQF Level 6 of physiotherapy in neurology. Specifications in neurology were made for the following roles: Expert in Physiotherapy, Communicator, Teamworker, Health Promoter, Innovator, Health Professional. Conclusion Recommendations for quality assurance in tertiary education are actively pursued across all participating Universities of Applied Sciences. This allows a better comparability of the educational standards in Physiotherapy in Neurology in Europe as well as internationally. This is of great importance for physiotherapists as health professionals.

Biochemical visual literacy with constructive alignment: Outcomes, assessment, and activities

Biochemical visual literacy with constructive alignment: Outcomes, assessment, and activities

Secret destinations

‘All journeys have secret destinations of which the traveller is unaware’ (Martin Buber). All learning results in learning outcomes of some form, planned or otherwise, but the term is now widely used to refer only to those learning outcomes that predetermine what those outcomes will be – the intended or specified learning outcomes of the Quality Assurance Agency’s (QAA) Code of Practice. A typical definition of learning outcomes is that they provide a statement of what a learner is expected to know, understand and be able to do at the end of a period of learning. Advocates of learning outcomes claim that it is impossible to evaluate learning unless clearly defined goals have been specified and agreed. But if learning outcomes prescribe the results of a period of learning before the outset of the learning journey, how appropriate are they to learning in subjects where we are educating for creativity, subjects where often we want our students to discover secret destinations, and where we may deliberately wish to avoid prescribing clearly defined goals? Can learning outcomes be articulated in such ways that they encourage the traveller to positively seek out secret destinations that may be unknown to the tutor as well as the student? Or do we need an alternative to this behaviourist approach to learning? This paper considers the appropriateness or otherwise of learning outcomes in contexts where students are expected to develop and demonstrate their creativity. It provides a brief examination of alternative approaches to prescribed learning outcomes, and considers whether the QAA’s Academic Infrastructure facilitates creativity or conformity. Finally, it sets an agenda for change to address the shortcomings of prescriptive learning outcomes.