Assessing Learning Outcomes of Course Descriptors Containing Object Oriented Programming Concepts

This study follows well-published educational criteria for assessing the quality of learning outcomes and investigates how these criteria are applied to descriptors of courses that include object oriented programming concepts. These quality criteria aim to ensure that learning outcomes are specific,...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:New Zealand journal of educational studies Jg. 54; H. 2; S. 345 - 356
Hauptverfasser: Abuaiadah, Diab, Burrell, Chris, Bosu, Michael, Joyce, Sue, Hajmoosaei, Abdolreza
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: Singapore Springer Singapore 01.11.2019
Springer
Schlagworte:
Course Descriptions
Criteria
Education
Educational Objectives
Evaluation
Foreign Countries
Higher Education
Object-oriented programming (Computer science)
Programming
Quality Control
New Zealand
Course design
Assessment structure
Marking criteria
Learning outcome
Object oriented programming
ISSN:0028-8276, 2199-4714
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This study follows well-published educational criteria for assessing the quality of learning outcomes and investigates how these criteria are applied to descriptors of courses that include object oriented programming concepts. These quality criteria aim to ensure that learning outcomes are specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-scaled. The study examined course descriptors from all universities in New Zealand and found a significant gap between the published criteria and the learning outcomes—it is clear that learning outcomes are widely open to interpretation and do not meet the criteria. There is a minimal level of detail provided in these outcomes that are insufficient to satisfy the stated criteria. This study then presents a new and more detailed implementation of outcomes augmented with assessment structure and marking criteria to show that adding more detail significantly increases the complexity of course descriptors. This highlights the need for robust discussions between the writers of course descriptors who look for simplicity and flexibility and quality assessors who expect precision and specifics.
Bibliographie:Includes references, tables
ISSN:0028-8276
2199-4714
DOI:10.1007/s40841-019-00139-y