Characteristics of Outcomes-Based Education

Institutional Outcomes Program

Course/Learning Instructional Outcomes
3 Domains of Learning
Additional Levels by Kendall and Marzano

What is Outcome-based education?

Outcome-based education is a model of education that rejects the traditional focus on what
the school provides to students, in favor of making students demonstrate that they "know and are
able to do" whatever the required outcomes are.

OBE reforms emphasize setting clear standards for observable, measurable outcomes.
Nothing about OBE demands the adoption of any specific outcome. For example, many
countries write their OBE standards so that they focus strictly on mathematics, language, science,
and history, without ever referring to attitudes, social skills, or moral values.

The key features which may be used to judge if a system has implemented an outcomes-
based education system are:

    Creation of a curriculum framework that outlines specific, measurable outcomes. The
standards included in the frameworks are usually chosen through the area's normal political
process.
    A commitment not only to provide an opportunity of education, but to require learning
outcomes for advancement. Promotion to the next grade, a diploma, or other reward is granted
upon achievement of the standards, while extra classes, repeating the year, or other consequences
entail upon those who do not meet the standards.
    Standards-based assessments that determines whether students have achieved the stated
standard. Assessments may take any form, so long as the assessments actually measure whether
the student knows the required information or can perform the required task.
    A commitment that all students of all groups will ultimately reach the same minimum
standards. Schools may not "give up" on unsuccessful students.

Outcomes
The emphasis in an OBE education system is on measured outcomes rather than "inputs," such as
how many hours students spend in class, or what textbooks are provided. Outcomes may include
a range of skills and knowledge. Generally, outcomes are expected to be concretely measurable,
that is, "Student can run 50 meters in less than one minute" instead of "Student enjoys physical
education class." A complete system of outcomes for a subject area normally includes everything
from mere recitation of fact ("Students will name three tragedies written by Shakespeare") to
complex analysis and interpretation ("Student will analyze the social context of a Shakespearean
tragedy in an essay"). Writing appropriate and measurable outcomes can be very difficult, and
the choice of specific outcomes is often a source of local controversies.

Each educational agency is responsible for setting its own outcomes. Under the OBE model,
education agencies may specify any outcome (skills and knowledge), but not inputs (field trips,
arrangement of the school day, teaching styles). Some popular models of outcomes include the
National Science Education Standards and the NCTM's Principles and Standards for School
Mathematics.

Approaches to grading, reporting, and promoting

An important by-product of this approach is that students are assessed against external, absolute
objectives, instead of reporting the students' relative achievements. The traditional model of
grading on a curve (top student gets the best grade, worst student always fails (even if they know
all the material), everyone else is evenly distributed in the middle) is never accepted in OBE or
standards-based education. Instead, a student's performance is related in absolute terms: "Jane
knows how to write the letters of the alphabet" or "Jane answered 80% of questions correctly"
instead of "Jane answered more questions correctly than Mary."

Under OBE, teachers can use any objective grading system they choose, including letter grades.
In fact, many schools adopt OBE methods and use the same grading systems that they have
always used. However, for the purposes of graduation, advancement, and retention, a fully
developed OBE system generally tracks and reports not just a single overall grade for a subject,
but also give information about several specific outcomes within that subject. For example,
rather than just getting a passing grade for mathematics, a student might be assessed as level 4
for number sense, level 5 for algebraic concepts, level 3 for measurement skills, etc. This
approach is valuable to schools and parents by specifically identifying a student's strengths and
weaknesses.

In one alternate grading approach, a student is awarded "levels" instead of letter grades. From
Kindergarten to year 12, the student will receive either a Foundational level (which is pre-
institutional) or be evidenced at levels 1 through to 8. In the simplest implementation, earning a
"level" indicates that the teacher believes that a student has learned enough of the current
material to be able to succeed in the next level of work. A student technically cannot flunk in this
system: a student who needs to review the current material will simply not achieve the next level
at the same time as most of his same-age peers. This acknowledges differential growth at
different stages, and focuses the teacher on the individual needs of the students.

In this approach, students and their parents are better able to track progress from year to year,
since the levels are based on criteria that remain constant for a student's whole time at school.
However, this experience is perceived by some as a flaw in the system: While it is entirely
normal for some students to work on the same level of outcomes for more than one year parents
and students have been socialized into the expectation of a constant, steady progress through
schoolwork. Parents and students therefore interpret the normal experience as failure.

This emphasis on recognizing positive achievements, and comparing the student to his own prior
performance, has been accused by some of "dumbing down" education (and by others as making
school much too hard), since it recognises achievement at different levels. Even those who would
not achieve a passing grade in a traditional age-based approach can be recognized for their
concrete, positive, individual improvements.

OBE-oriented teachers think about the individual needs of each student and give opportunities
for each student to achieve at a variety of levels. Thus, in theory, weaker students are given work
within their grasp and exceptionally strong students are extended. In practice, managing
independent study programs for thirty or more individuals is difficult. Adjusting to students'
abilities is something that good teachers have always done: OBE simply makes the approach
explicit and reflects the approach in marking and reporting.

Differences with traditional education methods

In a traditional education system and economy, students are given grades and rankings compared
to each other. Content and performance expectations are based primarily on what was taught in
the past to students of a given age. The basic goal of traditional education was to present the
knowledge and skills of the old generation to the new generation of students, and to provide
students with an environment in which to learn, with little attention (beyond the classroom
teacher) to whether or not any student ever learns any of the material. It was enough that the
school presented an opportunity to learn. Actual achievement was neither measured nor required
by the school system.

In fact, under the traditional model, student performance is expected to show a wide range of
abilities. The failure of some students is accepted as a natural and unavoidable circumstance. The
highest-performing students are given the highest grades and test scores, and the lowest
performing students are given low grades. (Local laws and traditions determine whether the
lowest performing students were socially promoted or made to repeat the year.) Schools used
norm-referenced tests, such as inexpensive, multiple-choice computer-scored questions with
single correct answers, to quickly rank students on ability. These tests do not give criterion-based
judgments as to whether students have met a single standard of what every student is expected to
know and do: they merely rank the students in comparison with each other. In this system, grade-
level expectations are defined as the performance of the median student, a level at which half the
students score better and half the students score worse. By this definition, in a normal population,
half of students are expected to perform above grade level and half the students below grade
level, no matter how much or how little the students have learned.

Characteristics of OBE
OBE is assessment driven: thus assessment criteria must indicate how to determine whether a
student has achieved the outcome to a satisfactory standard and what makes the difference
between acceptable and unacceptable performance of the outcome.

OBE assessment tools are more learner centered than traditional forms of assessment. The OBE
philosophy envisages a successful learning experience for all learners. Two broad types of
assessment are identified: formative and summative. Both are designed to improve the quality
of students learning experiences by focusing on significant knowledge and skills and to provide
accurate estimates of current competence or potential in relation to desired outcomes to enable
lecturers to make appropriate decisions. Formative assessment refers to assessment that takes
place during the process of learning and teaching. Its purposes may be to diagnose learner
strengths and weaknesses, or provide feedback to learners on their progress (or lack thereof).
Formative assessment takes place on a continuous basis during the course of learning.
Summative assessment takes place at the end of a module or course, and traditionally takes the
form of an exam.

OBE is criterion referenced, i.e., it measures the learners achievement against a set of
predetermined criteria and not in relation to the achievement of other learners.

OBE makes use of clearly stated outcomes and assessment criteria. Each module or qualification
states outcomes (known as general, cross-field and specific outcomes) and associated assessment

criteria clearly, so that students understand in advance what they have to do to achieve these
outcomes and assessors can use the criteria to assess the outcomes with reasonable objectivity/
reliability.

OBE permits a variety of assessment methods and instruments. Because assessment assesses a
range of elements (knowledge, performance, abilities, etc.) it allows for the use of a variety of
assessment methods and instruments. It also allows for the collection of evidence from a variety
of sources.

Institutional Learning Outcomes are the knowledge, skills, abilities, and attitudes that students
are expected to develop as a result of their overall experiences with any aspect of the college,
including courses, programs, and student services.

Course Learning OUTCOMES

Course Learning Outcomes are specific and measurable statements that define the knowledge,
skills, and attitudes learners will demonstrate by the completion of a course. Learning
Outcomes are written with a verb phrase and declare a demonstrable action within a given time
frame, such as by the end of the course. Ideally, they should be observable, measurable, and
achievable within a specified time period. For some, this definition describes what they have
already understood to be Learning Objectives. Read more about Learning Outcomes vs Learning
Objectives.

Writing an effective learning outcome that is measurable involves the structuring of two parts, a

verb and an object. The verb phrase describes the intended cognitive process or what the learner
is intended to do, and the object phrase describes the knowledge students are expected to acquire
or construct (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).

Bloom's revised taxonomy provides a framework for transforming competencies into essential
learning outcomes or intended results. The revised taxonomy organizes these verbs or cognitive
processes on a scale of lower-order to higher-order thinking skills. These categories define what
learners should be able to do at each level of cognitive complexity. For example, having students
"explain" or "discuss" a concept will demonstrate their understanding (lower-level), and having
students "calculate" or "justify" will demonstrate their ability to analyze and evaluate (higher-
level). 

Note that not all actions or processes are measurable. For example, "understand" is a category
label for the lower-level thinking skill of comprehension; however the verb understand itself is
difficult to observe and cannot be easily measured. Learners can demonstrate understanding by
their ability to define, describe, or explain. Use these kinds of observable action words in place
of understand. It is often helpful to consider how you will assess the evidence of learning and
how you will measure levels of mastery in order to determine the learning outcome you expect at
the end of a course.

Learning can generally be categorized into three domains: cognitive, affective, and
psychomotor.

Bloom's Taxonomy
The Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, known as Bloom's Taxonomy (Bloom, Engelhart,
Furst, & Krathwohl, 1956) is one of the most recognized learning theories in the field of
education. Educators often use Bloom's Taxonomy to create learning outcomes that target not
only subject matter but also the depth of learning they want students to achieve, and to then
create assessments that accurately report on students’ progress towards these outcomes
(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). 

An introduction to Bloom's Taxonomy

Bloom's Taxonomy comprises three learning domains: the cognitive, affective, and psychomotor,
and assigns to each of these domains a hierarchy that corresponds to different levels of learning. 

It's important to note that the different levels of thinking defined within each domain of the
Taxonomy are hierarchical. In other words, each level subsumes the levels that come before it.
So, if we look at the cognitive domain for example (which is represented in Figure 1), we can
infer that before a student can conduct an analysis, they first might need to know the methods of
analysis, understand the different elements to review, and consider which method to apply. It is
only then that they will be ready to conduct the analysis itself.

Figure 1: The hierarchy of the cognitive domain of Bloom's Taxonomy (1956).

Bloom's Taxonomy revised

In 2001, David Krathwohl (one of Bloom’s original collaborators) and co-editor Lorin

Anderson published a revision to the 1956 hierarchy with contributions from cognitive
psychologists, curriculum theorists, instructional researchers, and testing and assessment
specialists. This new revised version introduced a key change to the cognitive domain of Bloom's
Taxonomy: it shifted the language used from nouns to verbs (see Figure 2) and thereby focused
the attention away from acquisition and toward active performance of the types of learning
involved in each stage of the hierarchy. "Synthesis" was also dropped and "create" was moved to
the highest level of the domain.

Figure 2. Anderson and Krathwol's (2001) revision to Bloom's cognitive hierarchy.

Bloom's Taxonomy in practice

To provide a deeper look at how Bloom's Taxonomy works in practice, we break down
each domain — the cognitive, affective, and pyschomotor — in the following sections of this
Teaching Tip. Here, we present example learning outcomes and assessments mapped to each
level of the domain hierarchies to help you make use of Bloom’s Taxonomy.
Cognitive domain

The cognitive domain is focused on intellectual skills such as critical thinking, problem solving,
and creating a knowledge base. It was the first domain created by the original group of Bloom’s
researchers. The cognitive hierarchy spans from simple memorization designed to build the
knowledge of learners, to creating something new based on previously-learned information. In
this domain, learners are expected to progress linearly through the hierarchy, beginning at
"remember" and ending at "create." 

When writing your own learning outcomes, we encourage you to choose verbs that best describe
what is expected (e.g., for remember, you might consider define, identify, list, recall, recognize,
match, etc.). A search for “Bloom’s Verbs” will provide lists of synonyms to use.

Cognitive hierarchy

 Remember
o Sample learning outcome: Remember the names and relationships of a cast of
characters in a play.
o Sample assessment/activity: A multiple-choice test designed to test the memory
of learners.
o Rationale: A multiple-choice test will allow educators to see whether students
have effectively memorized the given material.
 Understand
o Sample learning outcome: Understand and explain the main ideas of a play or
piece of literature.
o Sample assessment/activity: Write a short (1 page) paper summarizing the plot
and most important events in the play.
o Rationale: Writing a summary encourages learners to think about what the most
important parts of a piece of literature are, and to decide which aspects of the
plot to discard in favor of a concise summary. It allows educators to evaluate
whether or not they have understood the main idea of the play. 
 Apply
o Sample learning outcome: Apply the main ideas/themes in the play to another
context.
o Sample assessment/activity: Write an advice column responding to one of the
characters.
o Rationale:  In doing this assignment, learners will consider the implications of a
character’s actions outside of the consequences shown in the play.
 Analyze
o Sample learning outcome: Be able to analyze the relative roles of each character
in the play and their relationships to each other.
o Sample assessment/activity: Write an analytical paper comparing the antagonists
and protagonists of the play.
 o Rationale: Through this assignment, as learners consider what makes each
character an antagonist or a protagonist, they need to use both their knowledge of
the play and critical thinking skills.
 Evaluate
o Sample learning outcome: Evaluate the decisions of characters in the play, and
support your evaluation with textual evidence.
o Sample assessment/activity: Write a response to one of the events in the play,
either supporting or rejecting their actions on the basis of evidence from the play
as well as personal opinion and projected/actual consequences of action.
o Rationale: Through this assignment, learners will consider the rationale and
consequences for actions in the play, leading them to understand and make
judgements about the validity of a character’s decision making.
 Create
o Sample learning outcome: Create a new and unique piece of writing using
similar plot devices.
o Sample assessment/activity: Create a short story using similar plot devices in a
new time or setting.
o Rationale: Through this activity, learners must integrate the plot devices and
writing techniques into a new setting, allowing them to practice their creative
writing skills and showing their full understanding of the writer's techniques.

Affective domain

The affective domain focuses on the attitudes, values, interests, and appreciation of learners. The
hierarchy associated with it begins with receiving and listening to information, and extends to
characterization, or internalizing values and consistently acting upon them. It focuses on
allowing learners to understand what their own values are and how they have developed.

Affective hierarchy

 Receiving
o Sample learning outcome: Listen to other students with respect.
o Sample assessment/activity: Be an audience member to another student’s
presentation, and then write a summary.
o Rationale: Through this assignment, learners will learn how to listen effectively
to others as well as remember key details about their presentation (used in writing
the summary).
 Responding
o Sample learning outcome: Speak effectively in front of an audience and actively
respond to others.
o Sample assessment/activity: Present on a subject in front of the class, and
answer questions from peers about their presentation.
o Rationale: Through this, learners will become more comfortable with public
speaking as well as more comfortable with contributing to a discussion in the
form of answering questions.
  Valuing
o Sample learning outcome: Demonstrate and explain own values regarding
various topics.
o Sample assessment/activity: Write an opinion piece on any issue, explaining
one’s own stance and reasons supporting that stance.
o Rationale: Through this, learners will explore not only their own values but why
they support their values, giving them a chance to understand more fully their
own value system.
 Organization
o Sample learning outcome: Compare value systems and understand evidence
behind values.
o Sample assessment/activity: Organize and compare different cultural value
systems, evaluating the differences between them and why these differences may
have arisen.
o Rationale: In doing this activity, learners will consider how value systems are put
into place and organized, as well as the evidence that supports different value
systems across the world.
 Characterization
o Sample learning outcome: Work well in a team of peers.
o Sample assessment/activity: A group project, including group work on any
assignment.
o Rationale: By working in a group, learners must balance their own values with
the values of the team, as well as prioritize tasks and practice teamwork.

Psychomotor domain

The psychomotor domain encompasses the ability of learners to physically accomplish tasks and
perform movement and skills. There are several different versions including different hierarchies
– the examples here fall into Harrow’s (1972) theory of the psychomotor domain. This hierarchy
ranges from reflexes and basic movement to non-discursive communication and meaningfully
expressive activity.

Psychomotor Hierarchy

 Reflex
o Sample learning outcome: Instinctively respond to a physical stimulus.
o Sample assessment/activity: A game of dodgeball.
o Rationale: Learners must react (dodge) the balls that are being thrown at them,
allowing them to develop their reflexive skills.
 Basic fundamental movements
o Sample learning outcome: Perform a simple action (including running and
throwing).
o Sample assessment/activity: A game of dodgeball.
o Rationale: Learners must run and throw to actively engage the opposing team,
allowing them to develop these skills.
  Perceptual abilities
o Sample learning outcome: Use more than one ability to integrate different
sensory perceptions.
o Sample assessment/activity: A game of catch or soccer (or other game involving
movement and passing).
o Rationale: Learners must integrate running, visual information about the position
of the ball, and predictive information about the future position of the ball.
 Physical abilities
o Sample learning outcome: Sustain an activity for a set period of time.
o Sample assessment/activity: Run for 25 minutes steadily.
o Rationale: This activity is a measure of the learner’s stamina and physical fitness.
 Skilled movements
o Sample learning outcome: Adapt one’s behaviour and movement to better
achieve goals.
o Sample assessment/activity: A soccer or other strategic game (football, hockey).
o Rationale: This activity allows teams to change their strategy and individuals to
change their physical behaviour depending on the response of the other team.
 Non-discursive communication
o Sample learning outcome: Express oneself through purposeful movement and
activity.
o Sample assessment/activity: A soccer or other strategic game (football, hockey)
o Rationale: These games all involve teamwork, strategy, and integrative and
purposeful movement. Successful teams must integrate all of their senses,
communicate through movement, and use a variety of adaptive strategies.

Additional Levels by Kendall and Marzano

http://earth.callutheran.edu/archived-sites/institutional-
research/documents/MarzanoandKendall2007Taxonomy.pdf