Improved outcomes

December 15, 2011

Geoffrey Channon is quite right to warn us of the careless use of "neoliberal business-speak" such as delivery of courses (Letters, 8 December). However, he is wrong to include in that pernicious vocabulary the term "learning outcomes" when describing courses. This is a usefully student- and learning-oriented replacement for "objectives", which were invariably written in terms of teaching and content.

In fact, objectives are more suitable for delivery than are learning outcomes. If the learning outcomes to which Channon refers do, as he claims, confine and predetermine teaching and learning, they need not. Better ones can be written that really express what we expect students will learn from our courses. That is not marketisation, just clarity in expressing our intentions in terms of our students' learning. They have a right to that.

Stephen Bostock, Head of the Centre for Learning, Teaching and Assessment, Glyndwr University

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most Commented

Worried man wiping forehead
Two academics explain how to beat some of the typical anxieties associated with a doctoral degree

Felipe Fernández-Armesto takes issue with a claim that the EU has been playing the sovereignty card in Brexit negotiations

John McEnroe arguing with umpire. Tennis

Robert MacIntosh and Kevin O’Gorman explain how to negotiate your annual performance and development review

Man throwing axes

UCU attacks plans to cut 171 posts, but university denies Brexit 'the reason'

looking through a gap

University appeals ICO notice to publish report on refusal to take part in league tables