Appendix K - Assessing the Quality of Intended Outcome Statements
Copyright© 2016 Stiehl & Sours. Limited rights granted to photocopy for instructor and classroom use.
Template: Scoring Guide—Assessing the Quality of Intended Outcome Statements
|
Rating scale: 1=absent 2=minimally met 3=adequately met 4=exceptionally met
|
Characteristics of Good Learning Outcome Statements
|
Suggestions or
Improvements |
| 1. Action |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
| All the statements are written in active voice, and the action words have been carefully chosen to describe the intention. |
|
|
|
|
|
| 2. Context |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
| All the statements describe what you envision students doing “after” and “outside” this academic experience—because of this experience. |
|
|
|
|
|
| 3. Scope |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
| Given the time and resources available, the outcome statements represent reasonable expectations for students. |
|
|
|
|
|
| 4. Complexity |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
| The statements, as a whole, have sufficient substance to drive decisions about what students need to learn in this experience. |
|
|
|
|
|
| 5. Brevity and Clarity |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
| The language is concise and clear, easily understood by students and stakeholders. |
|
|
|
|
|