Writing the Course Outcomes Effectively (JEYA JEEVAHAN)

PEO
PO
PSO
Vision
CO CO
CO
Mission
CO
CO
CO
CO
W R I T I N G
COs
E F F E C T I V E L Y

2
A course curriculum or a list of topics covered in syllabus is too broad.
Instead, OBE lists the course outcomes (COs) to each course, which
are essentially the competencies or milestones demonstrated by the
students at the end of a course. These COs tie back into the learning
objectives of the course itself. When writing the course outcomes, it is
important to ensure that the COs describes what skills students will be
able to perform.
Before rushing into writing the course outcomes, it is important to
know about three domains of learning, and the pyramid of learning.
THREE DOMAINS OF LEARNING
Learning is not an event, but a process. During this process of learning,
our brain takes in information, process it, connect it, catalogue it, and
use it (and, sometimes, get rid of it). There are three main domains of
learning that all teachers should know and use them during the course
design and delivery. Educators recognize that students learn in
different ways, requiring them to establish teaching methods that
emphasize each student’s distinctive strengths.
There are three domains of learning (See Figure below): (a) cognitive
domain (thinking), (b) affective domain (social/emotional/feeling), and
(c) psychomotor domain (physical/kinesthetic) domain, and each one
of these has a taxonomy associated with it. The domains of learning
teach students to think critically by using methods that make the most
sense to them. They also give teachers tools to cater the learning
experience to the specific needs of each student. By assigning tasks
with a learning domain in mind, teachers can help students
understand and retain information based on how they learn best.
Thus, all teachers should attempt to develop the course outcomes
that requires all 3 domains of learning. This diversified approach helps
create well-rounded learning experiences through different learning
modalities.
WRITING COs EFFECTIVELY

3
Cognitive refers to conscious intellectual activity such as thinking,
reasoning, or remembering. The cognitive domain focuses on how the
brain acquires knowledge and process the information to develop the
intellectual skills. This includes the recall or recognition of specific
facts, procedural patterns, and concepts that serve in the
development of intellectual abilities and skills.
Affective refers to those actions that result from and are influenced
by emotions. This affective domain focuses on the ways in which we
handle all things related to emotions, such as feelings, values,
appreciation, enthusiasm, motivations, and attitudes.
Psychomotor refers to how conscious mental activity creates physical
movement. The psychomotor domain focuses on the development of
physical skills including movement, coordination and strength. One
area of psychomotor development demonstrates fine motor skills
through hand-eye coordination which can include activities such as
threading a needle, catching a ball, and writing. It measures speed,
strength, endurance, coordination, precision, etc.
Figure 1: Three Domains of Learning

4
Within each domain of learning are multiple levels of learning that
progress from more basic, surface-level learning to more complex,
deeper-level learning. Taxonomy, a classification scheme, is used to
categorize the multiple levels of learning. The taxonomy can be
thought of as degrees of difficulty. The taxonomy is categorized into
levels to proceed from the simplest (concrete knowledge) to more
complex levels (abstract knowledge). According to Bloom, each level
must be mastered before moving to the next higher order. For
example, a learner would have to first recall the data, and then
understand it before he/she is able to apply it. As you move higher,
each level becomes more challenging. The higher levels require more
complex involvement. Each taxonomy level is associated with the
number of keywords. These keywords are essentially the action verbs
that the instructors can use to describe the learning outcomes
corresponding to each level.
Benjamin Bloom and his co-authors were the first to involve in
describing the taxonomy for the cognitive domain in 1956 in his book
titled “Taxonomy of Educational Objectives”. This is called Bloom’s
Taxonomy. David Krathwohl devised the taxonomy for the affective
domain in 1964. This is called Krathwohl’s taxonomy. Three different
versions of taxonomy for psychomotor domain were proposed by 3
different authors separately, namely, Dave (1970), Harrow (1972), and
Simpson (1972). In 2001, Krahtwohl and Anderson, the Bloom’s former
students and colleagues revised the taxonomy to reflect its use in
modern situations. While there are many attempts in developing the
taxonomies by different people, the following three taxonomies are
most commonly appreciated and adapted by the educators. These
popular taxonomies are listed below:
Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised for the Cognitive Domain
Krathwohl’s Taxonomy for the Affective Domain
Dave’s Taxonomy for the Psychomotor Domain

5
REVISED BLOOM’S TAXONOMY FOR COGNITIVE DOMAIN
Bloom’s Taxonomy attempts to classify learning stages from
remembering facts to creating new ideas based on the acquired
knowledge. Figure shown below shows the six levels of Bloom’s
taxonomy. The idea of Bloom’s Taxonomy is that learning is a
consecutive process. Before applying a concept in real life, we must
understand it. Before we understand a concept, we must remember
the key facts related to it. The authors also defined cognitive
processes associated with these instructional goals. For example, the
ability to remember requires recognizing and recalling.
Figure 2: Bloom’s Taxonomy Levels
Remember: This level of learning is about memorizing basic facts,
dates, events, persons, places, concepts and patterns. The associated
cognitive processes are recognizing and recalling.
Understand: At this level, learners might be asked to explain a concept
in their own words, describe a mathematical graph or clarify a
metaphor. The processes associated with understanding are
interpreting, exemplifying, classifying, summarizing, inferring,
comparing and explaining.

6
Apply: At this level, use learned facts and abstractions in new contexts
and particular situations. The associated cognitive processes are
executing a procedure to a familiar task and implementing a procedure
to an unfamiliar task.
Analyze: At this level, students are supposed to break down concepts
and examine their relationships. The associated cognitive processes
are differentiating between relevant and irrelevant information,
organizing and attributing a point of view, bias, values, or intent
underlying presented material.
Evaluate: In this level, learners are expected to use their knowledge
and skills to appraise a situation, justify their stand or criticize others’
opinions. They should be able to point out logical fallacies in
arguments or compare a work to the highest standards in its field. The
associated cognitive processes are checking the inconsistencies or
fallacies in a process or product and critiquing inconsistencies
between a product and external criteria.
Create: This is the most complex and top level of the revised Bloom’s
Taxonomy. At this level, learners combine known patterns, ideas and
facts to create original work or formulate their solution to a problem.
The three associated cognitive processes are generating alternative
hypotheses based on criteria, planning a procedure for completing a
task and producing a new product/ process.
When talking about Bloom’s taxonomy, action verbs associated with
the categories and cognitive processes are often mentioned. The table
below shows a list of Bloom’s taxonomy action verbs. Instructors can
use these action verbs to describe the learning objectives
corresponding to each level of learning.

Level Action words
Remember
Choose, Define, Find, How, Label, List, Match, Draw,
Name, Omit, Recall, Select, Show, Spell, Tell, What, When,
Where, Which, Who, Why.
Understand
Classify, Discuss, Elaborate, Draw, Compare,
Differentiate, Contrast, Demonstrate, Explain, Illustrate,
Outline, Show, Summarize.
Apply
Choose, Draw, Construct, Develop, Identify, Organize,
Select, Solve, Determine, Calculate, Estimate.
Analyze
Categorize, Classify, Compare, Conclude, Contrast,
Discover, Distinguish, Examine, Infer, Inspect, List,
Simplify, Test.
Evaluate
Appraise, Assess, Choose, Compare, Conclude, Criticize,
Predict, Decide, Defend, Disprove, Interpret, Judge,
Justify, Prioritize, Prove, Rate, Recommend, Select.
Create
Adapt, Build, Change, Compile, Construct, Create, Design,
Develop, Elaborate, Formulate, Improve, Invent, Make,
Plan, Predict, Propose, Solve, Test.
7
Table 1: Bloom’s Taxonomy Levels and the Action Verbs

8
The revised Bloom's taxonomy is a two-dimensional framework
(knowledge and cognitive processing) for identifying and categorizing
the learning levels, as compared to the old Bloom's taxonomy. This
version differentiates between the knowledge and the other 5 levels of
Bloom's taxonomy. The other 5 levels deal with the mental and
intellectual abilities performed on, or with, that knowledge. The
revised Bloom's taxonomy differentiates between "knowing what" (the
content of thinking) and "knowing how" (the procedures used in
solving the problems). The knowledge is further divided into four
categories, namely, (a) factual, (b) conceptual, (c) procedural, and (d)
metacognition.
Factual Knowledge is the knowledge focusing on the basic elements
that students must know to be acquainted with a discipline or solve
problems in it. This includes the knowledge of terminology and the
knowledge of specific details and elements.
Conceptual Knowledge is the knowledge focusing on the
interrelationships among the basic elements within a larger structure
that enable them to function together. This includes the knowledge of
classifications and categories, knowledge of principles and
generalizations and the knowledge of theories, models, and structures.
Procedural Knowledge is the knowledge focusing on how to do
something; methods of inquiry, and criteria for using skills, algorithms,
techniques, and methods. It includes the knowledge of subject-
specific skills and algorithms, the Knowledge of subject-specific
techniques and methods, and the Knowledge of criteria for
determining when to use appropriate procedures.
Metacognitive Knowledge is the Knowledge of cognition in general as
well as awareness and knowledge of one’s own cognition. It involves
the strategic knowledge, the knowledge about cognitive tasks,
including appropriate contextual and conditional knowledge, and the
self-knowledge.

9
In the revised Taxonomy, any objective would be represented in two
dimensions as shown in Figure below. This is termed as the Taxonomy
Table. The Knowledge dimension would form the vertical axis of the
table, whereas the Cognitive Process dimension would form the
horizontal axis. The intersections of the knowledge and cognitive
process categories would form the cells. Consequently, any objective
could be classified in the Taxonomy Table in one or more cells that
correspond with the intersection of the column(s) appropriate for
categorizing the verb(s) and the row(s) appropriate for categorizing
the noun(s) or noun phrase(s).
Figure 3: The Taxonomy Table for the Revised Bloom’s Levels

10
KRATHWOHL’S TAXONOMY FOR AFFECTIVE DOMAIN
Krathwohl’s affective domain taxonomy is perhaps the best known of
any of the affective taxonomies. The affective domain focuses on the
attitudes, values, interests, and appreciation of learners. The figure
below shows the five levels of Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
Figure 4: Krathwohl’s Taxonomy Levels
Receiving: Receiving represents the lowest level of learning outcomes
in the affective domain. Receiving involves a passive awareness of
emotions and feelings and a student must succeed at this level to
learn at later stages.
Responding: Responding refers to active participation on the part of
the student. At this level he not only attends to a particular
phenomenon but also reacts to it in some way. A student actively
engages in the learning process by receiving it and reacting to it.

11
Valuing: Valuing is concerned with the worth or value a student
attaches to a particular object, phenomenon, or behavior. This ranges
in degree from the simpler acceptance of a value (desires to improve
group skills) to the more complex level of commitment (assumes
responsibility for the effective functioning of the group). For example,
a student may write an opinion article about a social topic they feel
strongly about, discussing and defending their stance.
Organizing: A student develops a value system by arranging their
values or beliefs in order of priority. Organizing is concerned with
bringing together values, resolving conflicts between them, and
beginning the building of an internally consistent value system. Thus,
the emphasis is on comparing, relating, and synthesizing values.
Learning outcomes may be concerned with the conceptualization of a
value (recognizes the responsibility of each individual for improving
human relations) or with the organization of a value system (develops
a vocational plan that satisfies his need for both economic security
and social service).
Internalizing Values: A student acts according to the values they have
developed and internalized as a personal philosophy. For example, a
student accepts that cheating is unethical and completes a difficult
assignment independently even though a friend offers to let them
copy their answers. At Characterization level of the affective domain,
the individual has a value system that has controlled his behavior for a
sufficiently long time for him to develop a characteristic lifestyle.
Thus, the behavior is pervasive, consistent, and predictable. Learning
outcomes at this level cover a broad range of activities, but the major
emphasis is on the fact that the behavior is typical or characteristic of
the student.
The Krathwohl taxonomy’s levels and the corresponding action verbs
to define the learning outcomes for the affective domain are listed in
the table below.

Level Action words
Receiving
Ask, Choose, Show willingness, Describe, Follow,
Pays attention, Hold, Identify, Locate, Name,
Points to, Select
Responding
Answer, Reply, Respond, Assist, Comply,
Conform, Discuss, Greet, Help, Label, Perform,
Practice, Present, Read, Recite, Tell, Report,
Select, Write.
Valuing
Complete, Describe, Elaborate, Differentiate,
Explain, Follow, Form, Initiate, Invite, Join,
Justify, Propose, Read, Report, Share, Study,
Work.
Organizing
Adhere, Alter, Arrange, Combine, Compare,
Complete, Defend, Explain, Generalize, Identify,
Integrate, Modify, Order, Organize, Prepare,
Relate
Internalizing
Value
Act, Discriminate, Display, Influence, Listen,
Modify, Perform, Practice, Propose, Qualify,
Question, Revise, Serve, Solve, Use, Verify.
12
Table 2: Krathwohl’s Taxonomy Levels and the Action Verbs

13
DAVE’S TAXONOMY FOR PSYCHOMOTOR DOMAIN
R. H. Dave published a chapter “Psychomotor levels” in the book titled
“Developing and Writing Behavioral Objectives” in 1970, which
provides insights about the taxonomy levels for the psychomotor
domain. Dave’s Psychomotor domain (1970) is probably the most
commonly referenced and used psychomotor domain interpretation.
The Dave’s taxonomy of psychomotor domain includes utilizing motor
skills and the ability to coordinate them. This psychomotor domain
includes physical movement, coordination, and use of the motor-skill
areas. Development of these skills requires practice and is measured
in terms of speed, strength, endurance, coordination, precision,
distance, procedures, or techniques in execution. Figure below shows
the Dave’s five levels of motor skills representing different degrees of
competence in performing a skill. It captures the levels of competence
in the stages of learning from initial exposure to final mastery.
Figure 5: Dave’s Taxonomy Levels

14
Imitation: Imitation involves the ability to learn and pattern your
behavior after someone else. The learner observes a skill and attempts
to repeat it, or sees a finished product and attempts to replicate it
while attending to an exemplar. At this level, the performance may be
of low quality.
Manipulation: Manipulation involves the ability to perform certain
tasks by memory or following instructions. The learner performs the
skill or produces the product in a recognizable fashion by following
general instructions rather than observation.
Precision: Precision involves the ability to perform certain tasks with
some level of expertise and without help or intervention from others.
The learner independently performs the skill or produces the product,
with accuracy, proportion, and exactness; at an expert level. At this
level, the performance becomes more exact and refined.
Articulation: Articulation involves the ability to adapt and integrate
multiple actions to develop methods to meet varying and novel
requirements. The learner modifies the skill or the product to fit new
situations; combines more than one skills in sequence with harmony
and consistency.
Naturalization: Naturalization is the ability to perform actions in an
automatic, intuitive or unconscious way. The learner accomplishes
one or more skills with ease and makes the skill automatic with limited
physical or mental exertion. At this level, the performance has become
second-nature or natural, without needing to think much about it.
The Dave’s taxonomy’s levels and the corresponding action verbs to
define the learning outcomes for the psychomotor domain are listed
in the table below.

Level Action words
Imitation
Attempt, Copy, Imitate, Mimic, Follow,
Repeat, Duplicate, Replicate, Reproduce
Manipulation
Act, Build, Execute, Perform, Complete,
Accomplish, Follow, Play, Produce
Precision
Achieve , Excel, Perform, Demonstrate,
Calibrate
Articulation
Adapt, Construct, Combine, Create,
Customize, Modify, Formulate,
Alter, Originate
Naturalization Create, Design, Develop, Invent, Manage
15
Table 3: Dave’s Taxonomy Levels and the Action Verbs

16
THE LEARNING RETENTION PYRAMID
The Learning Retention Pyramid is a theoretical model that illustrates
the various methods by which one can learn and each method’s
respective expected percentage of retention. Knowing about the
Learning Retention Pyramid can help you gain a better understanding
of how you can effectively comprehend new information that’s given
to you. The Learning Retention Pyramid was originally created by the
National Training Laboratories Institute during the 1960s, and while
some have recreated it over time, the primary information from the
original model remains the same. Figure below shows the learning
retention pyramid that shows the percentage of information retention
and the type of learning modes.
Figure 6: The Learning Retention Pyramid

17
The Learning Pyramid suggests that lecture is one of the most
ineffective methods for learning and retaining information. However,
auditory learners tend to find lectures more stimulating and
educational than students who have non-auditory learning styles.
Reading is another less effective method for acquiring and retaining
information. However, it is an effective method for a visual learner,
than for students with non-visual learning styles.
Audio-visual learning methods including videos, sound, pictures, and
graphs only lead to a 20% retention of information learned. However,
as the media and computer technology continue to evolve, new forms
of audio-visual instruction are leading to more effective learning and
retention of material.
Demonstration usually involves the teacher or professor providing
students a learning task that they can observe. Demonstration tends
to offer students less ambiguity than passive study methods and leads
to fewer misconceptions and greater understanding.
Discussion is a cooperative learning method that relies on students
interacting and studying material with other students and instructors.
Discussion Groups are intended to stimulate student thinking, and
increase participation and engagement.
Practice by doing, a form of “Discover Learning”, is one of the most
effective methods of learning and study. It makes material more
personal, and thus more meaningful to students.
The key to subject mastery is teaching it to others. If one is able to
accurately and correctly teach a subject to others, one has very good
mastery of the concepts, and superior retention and recall.
Some students retain and recall information best through visual
(spatial) learning, while others are aural (auditory) learners. To
maximize the effectiveness of teaching-learning process, educators
should involve the students in active learning and multi-modes.

18
DEFINING THE EFFECTIVE CO STATEMENTS
Course outcomes (COs) are clear statements that describe the
competences that students should possess upon completion of a
course. A CO is a concise description of what students will learn and
how that learning will be assessed. Having clearly articulated learning
outcomes can make designing a course, assessing student learning
progress, and facilitating learning activities easier and more effective.
Learning outcomes can also help students regulate their learning and
develop effective study strategies. COs are often presented
separately in the cognitive, psychomotor and affective domains, but
may also reflect a range of interacting knowledge, skills and attitudes.
Figure shows the structure or syntax used for writing the good quality
course outcomes.
Figure 6: Structure of a Typical CO Statement
Writing effective CO statements is crucial for designing a well-
structured and meaningful learning experience. Each course can have
6 COs. The CO structure of a course begins with “At the end of the
course or learning module, the students will be able to ...”, followed by
the CO statement. The CO statement has two parts: (a) Taxonomy
keyword and (b) The learning object.

19
For example, let’s consider the course syllabus of a course titled
“Fundamentals of Mechanical Engineering” as shown in Figure below.
Figure 7: Course Syllabus of a Sample Course
Now, we look at Unit 1. We can now write a CO statement based on the
course unit, and analyze the parts.
Figure 8: A Sample CO Statement
In the above CO statement, “List” is the taxonomy keyword and the
following terms “the idea generation methods” represent the learning
object. The CO requires the cognitive process, and hence the keyword
“List” represents the Revised Bloom’s taxonomy’s Remember level,
and the learning object “idea generation methods” represents the
Procedural Knowledge dimension. The additional words “used in
product development” makes the CO statement specific to the course
unit.

20
For the same course unit, the CO statements can be written with
different levels as shown below.
Figure 9: CO Statements at Different Bloom’s Levels
Let’s take another course titled “Engineering Materials and
Metallurgy”, and the CO statements can be written for Unit 1 with
different Bloom’s levels as shown below.
Figure 10: Sample CO Statements for a Course Unit
Remember
Understand
Apply
Analyze
Evaluate
Create

21
We may use the goal-setting techniques, such as SMART or FAST, to
define high-quality CO statements.
SMART framework breaks down learning objectives into five key
characteristics: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-
bound. Figure below shows the SMART elements.
Figure 11: SMART Goal-setting Framework
Specific: COs should be well-defined and unambiguous. Instead of
setting broad goals, educators should specify what learners will
achieve upon successful completion of the course.
Measurable: COs must include assessment methods and criteria for
measuring the progress and outcomes.
Attainable: COs should be realistic and attainable. Students should be
able to accomplish (not too difficult nor too easy) the given level, time,
prior learning and other factors.
Relevant: COs should focus on specific skills or knowledge that has
clear value to the student and the discipline learning.
Time-bound: COs should have a defined timeline, offering a clear
deadline for when the learning goal should be achieved, for example,
at the end of a lesson, chapter, course, or program.

22
FAST framework is one of the best alternatives to SMART Goals. While
SMART goals (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-
bound) are valuable, FAST goals add depth. FAST is the acronym for
Frequent discussion, Ambitious, Specific, and Transparent. Figure
below shows the elements of FAST goal-setting.
Figure 12: FAST Goal-setting Framework
Frequently Discussed: COs should not be well-defined after frequent
discussion by the instructors. Such COs should be embedded in
ongoing discussions to review, progress, and prioritize and provide
feedback. Frequent discussions about COs keep everyone aligned and
informed.
Ambitious: COs should be set so that they are challenging, but they
should not be impossible to achieve.
Specific: COs are translated into concrete metrics and milestones
(often defined by OKRs) that force clarity on how to achieve each goal
and measure the progress.
Transparent: The COs, the associated metrics, milestones, and
accomplishments are all made public so that every student knows
their learning goals.

23
While writing COs, we also consider some important points.
Reflect on student outcomes: COs should reflect what the
students are expected to know and/or be able to do by the end
of the course. It is not what instructors are going to do. Rather,
it is what the student will be able to demonstrate.
Realistic: COs should be measurable, meaningful, and they
should provide you with evidence. Not everything that is
important can be measured. There should be some way devised
to determine whether the student outcomes can be measured.
The COs should also be achievable within the timeframe.
Relevant: COs should be relevant to the course and should
address the real-world contexts or skills that matter to
students.
Use Simple Words: COs should be written in clear and simple
language that every student can understand. Jargons should
be avoided so that everyone understands the CO statements
correctly and unambiguously.
Avoid Using Passive Verbs: COs should not contain the passive
verbs such as demonstrate, learn, comprehend, understand,
apply, evaluate, and create. For example, because
understanding happens entirely in the learners’ minds, it
cannot be directly observed and therefore difficult to know
when or if learners truly understand. To know if the students
understand, we may use the action keywords like explain,
describe, summarize, etc.
Alignment with the Broader Goals: While goals or objectives
can be written more broadly, COs describe specifically how
learners will achieve the goals. Hence, the COs should be in
alignment with the course objectives and POs/PSOs.

24
QUALITY CHECK FOR THE CO STATEMENTS
Figure below shows a checklist used to verify the quality of the CO
statements for a course.
Figure 13: Checklist for the Quality of CO statements
Once the CO statements are written for a course, it is important to
check the quality of such statements. One way of checking the quality
of COs is to use a checklist. The checklist contains some questions to
check if all the required elements are present in the CO statements. By
answering to the questions in the checklist, one can evaluate whether
the quality of each CO statement is good-enough. If not, the
respective CO statements are revised and rechecked.

PREPARED BY
DR. J. JEYA JEEVAHAN
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
SATHYABAMA INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
SATHYABAMA DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITY
CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU, INDIA - 600119.

Writing the Course Outcomes Effectively (JEYA JEEVAHAN)

More Related Content

Similar to Writing the Course Outcomes Effectively (JEYA JEEVAHAN) (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Writing the Course Outcomes Effectively (JEYA JEEVAHAN)