5.3 Data Presentation 112
5.3.4 Theme Four: Outcomes / Aims and Objectives 154
STATEMENT OF SPECIFIC LEARNING OUTCOMES FOR THE MODULE
Explain and evaluate the nature of the curriculum within its historical and social context.
Distinguish between aims, objectives, outcomes and assessment,
Analyse the main determinants of curriculum and curriculum change.
Reflect critically on major issues in curriculum policy and practice in South Africa.
Discuss foundations for further studies in the field of curriculum by Designing a research proposal,
Identify, critique and engage in Curriculum change and context debates as they emerge in society, schools and classrooms
Apply and evaluate relevant Online curriculum design theories,
Use online resources that are relevant to the module.
Figure 5.15: Learning Outcomes of Curriculum Context and Change (Adapted from Online Learning Space).
The module contained eight specific learning outcomes that learners were expected to achieve at the end of the module. There has been debate around the issue of learning outcomes being given at the beginning of the module because it may restrict them from searching deeper into the learning opportunities (Khoza, 2010). However the facilitator suggested that it is integral for students to be aware of the learning outcomes with commencement of the module because students know what is expected of them, and can therefore perform accordingly. The learning outcomes further represent the intended outcomes of the module. This means the outcomes were specified in the curriculum plan for the module (Van den Akker et al, 2009). Further these outcomes also lie within the cognitive domain of Bloom’s taxonomy because they begin with words such as define, analyse, explain, distinguish, discuss and apply (Kennedy, Hyland & Ryan, 2006). When questioned as to whether the learning outcomes were achieved by students, the facilitator had this to say:
Facilitator: “They achieved them (learning outcomes) through the given tasks. The intended outcomes were all built into the tasks, so by completing the tasks they achieved all the intended outcomes.”
This suggests that the facilitator used the learning outcomes to evaluate students’ performance in terms of understanding the content. During each lecture the facilitator administered the content by first explaining the potential outcomes to be achieved. Significantly, the facilitator was continuously aware of the learning outcomes and was therefore spearheading them into the lectures. This was done in accordance with the aims and objectives of the module. This indicates then that there was a good balance between the content, aims/objectives and learning outcomes.
The researcher observed that students first learned the content and were then evaluated
according to the assessment tasks allocated. This suggests the relationship between these components were important to the learning process. Khoza (2013a) regards this alignment as pivotal in promoting a good learning signal.
The researcher explored further into the reality of students’ achievement of learning outcomes. It was discovered through document analysis that students truly were able to analyse, reflect, and explain curriculum policy, change and practise in South Africa and other countries. They were able to critique pertinent changes that were currently happening in South Africa like the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS), and the extent to which they perceived this to be a good learning framework. Their PowerPoint presentations revealed an in depth demonstration of analysis of other researchers in the field of curriculum, and how their perspectives influenced the students’ choice of research. All students submitted their assessment tasks and passed the module successfully. This affirms that they achieved the intended learning outcomes of the module because they understood the requirements in advance when they were first issued with the course outline. It further postulates that it is important for students to be aware of the learning outcomes early because this influences the extent to which they are able to achieve them.
The facilitator used face-to-face and online design theories (HW, SW and IW) to support the content being taught. Various online tools were used to teach students about theoretical frameworks and scholarly articles about research methodology. Consequently students were able to apply this knowledge in constructing their research proposals, and illicit an investigation which analysed the subjects they were currently teaching. Simultaneously, they were in the process of achieving the learning outcomes of the module. This suggests that there was a dynamic equilibrium between teaching strategies, assessment and learning outcomes. Kennedy, Hyland and Ryan (2006) concur that the assessment tasks should reflect the learning outcomes because students believe the assessment is the curriculum.
Importantly this theme has expressed that learning outcomes are achievable if they are clearly stated in support of criteria and assessment when used with HW, SW and IW resources to facilitate teaching and learning. Further when facilitators articulate the learning outcomes prior to the learning activity, then students are aware of what is expected of them and are likely to offer a better performance of the task. This supports the ideology behind a student-centred approach in the current ethos of teaching and learning. In summation, the findings that have emerged show that various components such as the teaching strategies/theories, content and assessment tasks are required to make the whole learning process successful, which is indicated by the learning outcomes achieved. As a result this supports the premise of the theoretical framework of activity
theory underlying this study which advocates that an activity system involves a reciprocal process (Kain & Wardle, 2008). As such the components are dependent and interdependent upon one another to achieve the desired outcomes of the learning activity.