Learning in outcome based education – does it lead to student engagement?

Authors

  • Kaija Kumpas-Lenk
  • Eve Eisenschmidt
  • Kirsti Rumma

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2017.5.2.09

Keywords:

outcome based education, student engagement, achievement of the intended learning outcomes in higher education, students and teachers’ perceptions

Abstract

Artikli aluseks oleva kvantitatiivse uuringu eesmärk on välja selgitada, kuidas üliõpilased ja õppejõud hindavad väljundipõhise õppe rakendumist õpiväljundite omandamist toetavate komponentide toel. Kuue Eesti kõrgkooli üliõpilaste (n = 1329) ja õppejõudude (n = 94) hinnangutest selgub, et õpiväljundite arusaadavus, õpikeskkond, õppematerjalid, sooritatud tööd, hindamisülesanded, tagasiside, tööde maht, õpetamine, õppijate motivatsioon ja rahulolu toetavad õpiväljundite saavutamist. Samas ilmneb uuringust, et üliõpilased ei panusta ise õppetöösse piisavalt ning ei ole kaasatud õppeprotsessi. Õppetöösse panustamist iseloomustavad peamiselt õppimisse kaasatuse, õppijate motivatsiooni ja tööde mahu tulemused. Õppimisse kaasatust ennustavad enamasti õppimisse panustamise, õppijate motivatsiooni ja rahulolu tulemused. Õppejõudude ja üliõpilaste hinnangud enamiku õpiväljundite omandamist toetavate komponentide kohta oluliselt ei erinenud, v.a hindamisülesannete, õppija motivatsiooni ja kursusega rahulolu puhul. Tulemused näitavad, et senisest enam on vaja toetada õppijaid aktiivse rolli ning vastutuse võtmisel.

PDF Summary

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Adam, S. (2008). Learning outcomes current developments in Europe: Update on the issues and applications of learning outcomes associated with the Bologna process. Retrieved from http://www.ehea.info/cid103095/learning-outcomes-edinburghfebruary-2008.html.

Baron, P., & Corbin, L. (2012). Student engagement: Rhetoric and reality. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(6), 759–772. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.655711

Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning – A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 27(6), 12–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.1995.10544672

Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2009). Õppimist väärtustav õpetamine ülikoolis. Keskmes õppija tegevused. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.

Brint, S., Cantwell, A. M., & Hanneman, R. A. (2008). The two cultures of undergraduate academic engagement. Research in Higher Education, 49(5), 383–402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9090-y

Carini, R. M., Kuh, G. D., & Klein, S. P. (2006). Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-005-8150-9

Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2013). The importance of autonomy for development and wellbeing. In B. Sokol, F. Grouzet, & U. Müller (Eds.), Self-regulation and autonomy: Social and Developmental dimensions of human conduct (pp. 19–46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139152198.005

Eesti elukestva õppe strateegia 2020 (2014). Tallinn: Haridus- ja Teadusministeerium. Külastatud aadressil https://www.hm.ee/et/elukestva-oppe-strateegia-2020.

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059

Gunuc, S., & Kuzu, A. (2015). Student engagement scale: Development, reliability and validity. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(4), 587–610. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.938019

Hadjianastasis, M. (2016). Learning outcomes in higher education: Assumptions, positions and the views of early-career staff in the UK system. Studies in Higher Education, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1141402

Huba, M. E., & Freed, J. E. (2000). Learner-centred assessment on college campuses: Shifting the focus from teaching to learning. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Hussey, T., & Smith, P. (2008). Learning outcomes: A conceptual analysis. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(1), 107–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510701794159

Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758–773. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.598505

Kuh, G. D. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning inside the national survey of student engagement. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 33(3), 10–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380109601795

Kuh, G. D. (2009). The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual and empirical foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2009(141), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.283

Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540–563. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2008.11772116

Kumpas-Lenk, K. (in review). University students’ learning experiences: Students and teachers’ perceptions. Teaching in Higher Education.

Kumpas-Lenk, K., & Eisenschmidt, E. (in review). Does the design of learning outcomes matter? Implications of Bloom’s taxonomy. Higher Education.

Kumpas-Lenk, K., Tucker, B. M., & Gupta, R. (2014). Validation of a unit evaluation survey for capturing students’ perceptions of teaching and learning: A comparison among Australian and Estonian higher education students. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 43, 178–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2014.08.001

Kõrgharidusstandard (2008). Riigi Teataja I 2008, 57, 322. Külastatud aadressil https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/110072013075?leiaKehtiv.

Lea, S. J., Stephenson, D., & Troy, J. (2003). Higher education students’ attitudes to student-centred learning: Beyond ’educational bulimia’? Studies in Higher Education, 28(3), 321–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070309293

Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (1991). Instructional discourse, student engagement, and literature achievement. Research in the Teaching of English, 25(3), 261–290.

Oliver, B., Tucker, B., Gupta, R., & Yeo, S. (2008). eVALUate: An evaluation instrument for measuring students’ perceptions of their engagement and learning outcomes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(6), 619–630. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930701773034

Pilli, E. (2009). Väljundipõhine hindamine kõrgkoolis. Tartu: Sihtasutus Archimedes.

Pilli, E., Sammul, M., Post, P., Aasjõe, Ü., & Kruusamäe, K. (2013). Eesti kõrgkoolide esmakursuslaste õpi- ja teadmuskäsitus. Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri, 1, 156–191. https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2013.1.08

Pilli, E., & Vanari, K. (2013). Defining the determining element of content mastery as the key aspect in congruence between learning outcomes and assessment. In E. Saar & R. Mõttus (Eds.), Higher education at a crossroad: The case of Estonia (pp. 267–282). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Postareff, L., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2008). Variation in teachers’ descriptions of teaching: Broadening the understanding of teaching in higher education. Learning and Instruction, 18(2), 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.01.008

Roosalu, T., Roosmaa, E-L., Lindemann, K., Reiska, E., Saar, E., Unt, M., … Lang, A. (2013). Täiskasvanud õppijad Eesti kõrgharidussüsteemis. Kes püüab kõigest väest, saab üle igast mäest? Tartu: Sihtasutus Archimedes.

Rutiku, S., Valk, A., Pilli, E., & Vanari, K. (2009). Õppekava arendamise juhendmaterjal. Tartu: Sihtasutus Archimedes.

Rytkönen, H., Parpala, A., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Virtanen, V., & Postareff, L. (2012). Factors affecting bioscience students’ academic achievement. Instructional Science, 40(2), 241–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-011-9176-3

Zepke, N., Leach, L., & Butler, P. (2014). Student engagement: Students’ and teachers’ perceptions. Higher Education Research & Development, 33(2), 386–398. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.832160

Tammets, K., & Pata, K. (2013). The trends and problems of planning outcome-based courses in e-learning. In E. Saar & R. Mõttus (Eds.), Higher education at a crossroad: The case of Estonia (pp. 283–303). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Tina, A. (2008). Kahetsükliline kõrgharidus ehk 3+2 süsteem. H. Aru (toim.), Bologna protsess Eestis 2004–2008 (lk 13–17). Tartu: Sihtasutus Archimedes.

Täht, K., Adov, L., Mägi, M-L., & Must, O. (2013). Does research-oriented university really have negative effect on students’ self-evaluation? In E. Saar & R. Mõttus (Eds.), Higher education at a crossroad: The case of Estonia (pp. 73–91). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Udam, M. (2008). Lihtsalt mõistetavate ja võrreldavate kraadide süsteem. H. Aru (toim.), Bologna protsess Eestis 2004–2008 (lk 9–12). Tartu: Sihtasutus Archimedes.

Udam, M., Seema, R., & Mattisen, H. (2015). Eesti kõrgharidus institutsionaalse akrediteerimise tulemuste taustal ehk Mida juhid peaksid teadma. Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri, 3(1), 80–102. https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2015.3.1.04

Vadi, M., Reino, A., & Aidla, A. (2014). Õppejõud ja üliõpilane: rollikäsitluse vaade. Uuringu lõpparuanne. Tartu: Sihtasutus Archimedes.

Valk, A. (toim.) (2008). Bologna protsess Eestis 2004–2008. Tartu: Sihtasutus Archimedes. Külastatud aadressil http://www2.archimedes.ee/hkk/File/Erasmus/Bologna+protsess+Eestis+2004+2008.pdf.

Virtanen, V., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2010). University students’ and teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning in the biosciences. Instructional Science, 38(4), 355–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9088-z

Published

2017-10-28

How to Cite

Kumpas-Lenk, K., Eisenschmidt, E., & Rumma, K. (2017). Learning in outcome based education – does it lead to student engagement?. Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri. Estonian Journal of Education, 5(2), 206–228. https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2017.5.2.09

Issue

Section

Articles