学生如何使用学习成果?小规模项目的结果

Andrew G D Holmes
{"title":"学生如何使用学习成果?小规模项目的结果","authors":"Andrew G D Holmes","doi":"10.22521/edupij.2020.92.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Pre-specified, prescribed or intended Learning Outcomes have been in use throughout higher education programs for over two decades. There is an assumption amongst quality assurance bodies and university program approval and review processes that \nstudents engage with them. Yet, learning outcomes may constrain learning, they may not always be understood by learners and their relevance to learning has been questioned. There is anecdotal evidence from lecturers that some students do not understand them and do not use or refer to them. This paper reports on a small-scale research project investigating how university student’s use prescribed learning outcomes in their everyday learning and when producing assessed work. No clear differences were found between higher and lower achieving students, yet there were differences between first- and third-year students. Surprisingly, some were able to achieve highly without referring to the outcomes against which they were assessed.","PeriodicalId":30989,"journal":{"name":"Educational Process International Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"(How) Do Students Use Learning Outcomes? Results from a Small-Scale Project\",\"authors\":\"Andrew G D Holmes\",\"doi\":\"10.22521/edupij.2020.92.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Pre-specified, prescribed or intended Learning Outcomes have been in use throughout higher education programs for over two decades. There is an assumption amongst quality assurance bodies and university program approval and review processes that \\nstudents engage with them. Yet, learning outcomes may constrain learning, they may not always be understood by learners and their relevance to learning has been questioned. There is anecdotal evidence from lecturers that some students do not understand them and do not use or refer to them. This paper reports on a small-scale research project investigating how university student’s use prescribed learning outcomes in their everyday learning and when producing assessed work. No clear differences were found between higher and lower achieving students, yet there were differences between first- and third-year students. Surprisingly, some were able to achieve highly without referring to the outcomes against which they were assessed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Process International Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Process International Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2020.92.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Process International Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2020.92.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

20多年来,预先规定、规定或预期的学习成果一直在整个高等教育项目中使用。质量保证机构和大学项目审批和审查过程中有一种假设,即学生参与其中。然而,学习结果可能会限制学习,学习者可能并不总是理解这些结果,并且它们与学习的相关性受到质疑。讲师提供的轶事证据表明,一些学生不理解它们,也不使用或提及它们。本文报道了一个小规模的研究项目,该项目调查了大学生在日常学习和制作评估作品时如何使用规定的学习成果。成绩较高和成绩较低的学生之间没有明显的差异,但一年级和三年级的学生之间存在差异。令人惊讶的是,有些人能够在不参考评估结果的情况下取得很高的成绩。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
(How) Do Students Use Learning Outcomes? Results from a Small-Scale Project
Pre-specified, prescribed or intended Learning Outcomes have been in use throughout higher education programs for over two decades. There is an assumption amongst quality assurance bodies and university program approval and review processes that students engage with them. Yet, learning outcomes may constrain learning, they may not always be understood by learners and their relevance to learning has been questioned. There is anecdotal evidence from lecturers that some students do not understand them and do not use or refer to them. This paper reports on a small-scale research project investigating how university student’s use prescribed learning outcomes in their everyday learning and when producing assessed work. No clear differences were found between higher and lower achieving students, yet there were differences between first- and third-year students. Surprisingly, some were able to achieve highly without referring to the outcomes against which they were assessed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Process International Journal
Educational Process International Journal Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
How Does Students’ Knowledge About Information-Seeking Improve Their Behavior in Solving Information Problems? Greek Preschool Teachers’ Professional Features and Their Knowledge and Views of the Official Standards of Early Writing Teaching Digital Leadership and Sustainable School Improvement—A Conceptual Analysis and Implications for Future Research Expectations for Training Mentors: Insights from a Preservice Language Teacher Education Program The Use of Works of Musical Art in Preschool Education: A Slovak Perspective
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1