Decoding CLO –PLO assessment for Quality improvement

There are multiple level of learning outcomes in a higher education institutions (HEIs), viz., Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs), that instructors expect students to achieve upon completion of a course; Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs), that every program endeavors its students to attain after completing the study major; and Institutional Learning Outcomes (ILOs), that are based on the needs of the institution’s constituencies (e.g., stakeholders, community, etc.) and what every institution expects its graduates to attain within a few years after graduation. The yardstick of attainment of each level of learning outcomes is the measure of attainment of knowledge, skills and values/ attitudes pertinent to each course/ program. A few enthusiast instructors may take a step further and design learning outcomes for each unit as well as module/ lesson. An important principle in understanding the Learning outcomes is that they are designed backward but delivered forward. Due to this requirement, it is deemed important that the learning outcomes at all levels are consistently aligned and mapped during their implementation.

There is a big difference between Learning outcomes, Learning goals (LGs) and learning objectives(LOs). While LGs represent the instructor's or the institution's perspective, showing the general content and direction of learning, and what the instructor or program aims to do, the LOs are steps that guide a faculty towards the goals. For example, a LG for an EFL program could be “to introduce students to major study areas of the EFL discipline,” the LOs, on the other hand, would specify what to teach in order to get the learning experience of those areas, e.g., the skills, grammar, vocabulary, etc. LOs are more specific than LGs, not necessarily observable nor measurable, but teacher-centered rather than student-centered. Both LGs and LOs, however aggregate to formulate individual course learning outcomes (CLOs)

CLOs

CLOs are specific statements, not more than 2 or 3 for each credit hour of a course, which state what a student is expected to articulate and perform within a few years after graduation. CLOs are classified into cognitive, behavioral or affective learning domains, corresponding to knowledge, skills and/ or attitudes/ values that stand as evidences of learning having occurred in a course. Although CLOs should represent the whole course curriculum, a few enthusiastic instructors may establish sub-CLOs for each smaller unit, module or assignment of the course. Hence, the unit of analysis becomes smaller, from course to module to assignment, and makes them easily quantifiable. The Faculty are expected to include these CLOs with the course syllabi provided to students at the start of each course. Last, but not the least, the CLOs should be observable, specific and measurable of the skills or competencies that a graduate attains as a result of the learning experience from a course. Hence, they should use active and measurable verbs (e.g. define, compare, examine, etc.) and avoid verbs like (e.g., recollect, understand, learn, etc.) which are too general.

PLOs

CLOs also contribute to the assessment of program learning outcomes (PLOs), formulated at the program level. A common feature of PLOs and CLOs is that both describe what students are expected to know and able to perform or attain by the time they graduate (in cognitive, behavioral and affective domains), corresponding to knowledge, skills and/ or attitudes/ values. However, PLOs differ from CLOs in many respects: PLOs are broad and few in number and are formulated at the program level; CLOs are specific to the individual course and are more numerous. PLOs may not be measurable but CLOs are. For instance, if a PLO of the EFL program is “Graduates will be able to communicate effectively in a foreign language,” the CLOs could be “Graduates will be able (i) to speak clearly fluently and spontaneously in a foreign language; (ii) to write a clear and meaningful essay, letter or a report in a foreign language; (iii) to present the findings in a group or in team,” and so on depending upon the individual skills course(s) under that program.

Purpose and objective of CLO PLO assessment

It is a good practice to involve in the CLO-PLO assessment task every year as it informs the faculty what students are learning; it provides a measure of the quality of learning, and insights how learning should improve. There are 2 types of CLO-PLO assessment: first type is the data aggregation for each course and for each student assessed in that course. This type requires the measurable data for all assessment tools used in the course, e.g. quizzes, assignment and mid/ final exams. In this type of assessment, it is required first to tabulate the disaggregated learning data for each student, across all courses and sections, branches, etc. Such longitudinal data follows the same sample over time, and may build cohorts to compare data over that period. For example, a 4-year bachelor study program would be a cohort longitudinal study collected sequentially from the same group of respondents (students) for the entire duration. The cohort longitudinal data would also allow to track trends and changes happening in the same student groups over time. This could be attainment of targets, number of graduates in each cohort, and like.

The second type is based on calculating the CLO-PLO attainment based on the grades achieved by students. An attainment target is set for each course or a set of courses e.g., 50% of students attain 75% of the grades and like. The percentage of attainment is mapped with the weightages decided beforehand by each course coordinator with respect to the learning domains of knowledge, skills and values. For example, if the course grades demonstrate the attainment higher than the target, i.e., 50% of students attain 75% of grades, the weightages deem to be correct. The weightages, however, should be modified in case of over-attainment or under-attainment of the target, as the case may be.

Whatever is the type of the CLO-PLO assessment, it provides instructors the opportunity to analyze their teaching and learning strategies and assessment methods. It allows instructors to plan curricular or pedagogical modifications, in order to enhance the students’ learning outcomes. All such modifications in teaching and assessment strategies should be included in annual program reports. This is also an important prerequisite for continuous quality improvement.