Volume 9 Issue 2 (2020)

(How) Do Students Use Learning Outcomes? Results from a Small-Scale Project

pp. 80-89  |  Published Online: June 2020  |  DOI: 10.22521/edupij.2020.92.1

Andrew G Holmes


Pre-specified, prescribed or intended Learning Outcomes have been in use throughout higher education programs for over two decades. There is an assumption amongst quality assurance bodies and university program approval and review processes that students engage with them. Yet, learning outcomes may constrain learning, they may not always be understood by learners and their relevance to learning has been questioned. There is anecdotal evidence from lecturers that some students do not understand them and do not use or refer to them. This paper reports on a small-scale research project investigating how university student’s use prescribed learning outcomes in their everyday learning and when producing assessed work. No clear differences were found between higher and lower achieving students, yet there were differences between first- and third-year students. Surprisingly, some were able to achieve highly without referring to the outcomes against which they were assessed.

Keywords: Learning outcomes, assessment, student achievement, education students, student achievement.


Adam, S. (2004). Using Learning outcomes. A consideration of the nature, role, application and implications for European education of employing learning outcomes at the local, national and international levels. Bologna seminar. Edinburgh, Scottish Executive.

Avis, J. (2000). Policing the subject: Learning outcomes, managerialism and research in PCET. British Journal of Educational Studies, 48(1), 38-57.

Barnett, R. (2011). The marketised university: defending the indefensible. In M. Molesworth, R. Scullion & E. Nixon (Eds.), The Marketisation of Higher Education and the Student as Consumer (pp. 39-51). London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

Beno, B. (2004). The role of student learning outcomes in accreditation quality review. New Directions for Community College, 126, 65-72.

Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university (3rd ed.). Milton Keynes, United Kingdom: Open University.

Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable Assessment: rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151-167.

Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2006). Aligning assessment with long-term learning. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(4), 399-413.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. In C. Camic, P. M. Camic, D. O. Long, A. T. Panther, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology, Vol. 2: Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 57-71). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful Qualitative Research; a Practical Guide for Beginners. London, United Kingdom: Sage.

Brown, R. (2011) The march of the market. In M. Molesworth, R. Scullion, & E. Nixon (Eds.), The Marketisation of Higher Education and the Student as Consumer (pp. 11-24). London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

Caspersen, J., & N. Frølich. (2015). Managing Learning Outcomes. In E. Reale, & E. Primeri (Eds.), The Transformation of University Institutional and Organizational Boundaries (pp. 187-202). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.

Ellis, G. (2004). Rough Guide to Learning Outcomes. Teesside University, Centre for Learning and Quality Enhancement.

Erikson, M. G., & Erikson, M. (2019). Learning outcomes and critical thinking – good intentions in conflict. Studies in Higher Education, 44(12), 2293-2303.

Furedi, F. (2003). Learning outcomes are corrosive. CAUT Bulletin 60(1).

Furedi, F. (2006). Where have all the intellectuals gone? Confronting 21st Century Philistinism. Including a reply to Furedi’s critics (2nd ed.). London, United Kingdom: Continuum.

Furedi, F. (2011). Introduction to the marketisation of higher education and the student as consumer. In M. Molesworth, R. Scullion, & E. Nixon (Eds.), The Marketisation of Higher Education and the Student as Consumer (pp. 1-8). London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

Furedi, F. (2012, November 29). The Unhappiness principle. Times Higher Education Supplement.

Greensted, C., & Hommel, U. (2014). Intended learning outcomes: Friend or foe? Global Focus, 8(1), 20-25.

Havnes, A., & Proitz, T. S. (2016). Why use learning outcomes in higher education? Exploring the grounds academic resistance and reclaim the value of unexpected learning. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 28, 205-223.

Heick, T. (2018, September 21). Learning outcomes: the cost of insisting what a student will understand. TeachThought. Accessed from https://www.teachthought.com/learning/pros-cons-predicting-learning-outcomes/

Holmes, A.G. (2018a). Problems with assessing student autonomy in higher education, an alternative perspective and a role for mentoring. Educational Process: International Journal, 7(1), 24-38.

Holmes, A. G. (2018b). The role of interest and enjoyment in determining students’ approach to learning. Educational Process: International Journal, 7(2), 140-150.

Holmes, A. G. (2019a). Constructivist learning in university undergraduate programmes. Has constructivism been fully embraced? Is there clear evidence that constructivist principles have been applied to all aspects of contemporary university undergraduate study? Shanlax International Journal of Education, 8(1), 7-15.

Holmes, A. G. (2019b). Learning Outcomes: A good idea yet with problems and lost opportunities. Educational Process: International Journal, 8(3), 159-169.

Hussey, T., & Smith, P. (2002). The trouble with learning outcomes. Active Learning in Higher Education, 3(3), 220-233.

Hussey, T., & Smith, P. (2003). The Uses of Learning Outcomes. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(3), 357-368.

Hussey, T., & Smith, P. (2008). Learning Outcomes: a conceptual analysis. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(1), 107-115.

Jackson, N. (2000). Programme Specification and its Role in Promoting an Outcomes Model of Learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 1(2), 132-151.

James, M., & Brown, S. (2005). Grasping the TLRP nettle: preliminary analysis and some enduring issues surrounding the improvement of learning outcomes. The Curriculum Journal, 16(1), 7-30.

Kuh, D., Jankowski, N., Ikenberry, S. O., & Kinzie, J. (2014). Knowing What Students Know and Can Do. The current state of learning outcomes assessment in US colleges and universities. Champaign, IL: National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment.

Lassnigg, L. (2012). ‘Lost in Translation’: Learning outcomes and the governance of education. Journal of Education and Work, 25(3), 299-330.

Love, K. (2008). Higher Education, pedagogy and the ‘consumerisation’ of teaching and learning. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 42(1) 15-33.

Maher, A. (2004). Learning outcomes in higher education: implications for curriculum design and student learning. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 3(2), 46-54.

Mann, S. J. (2004). Guidelines for Writing Aims and Intended Learning Outcomes at the Programme and Course level. Glasgow University, United Kingdom.

Merrill, M. D. (1991). Constructivism and Educational design. Educational Technology, 31(5), 45-53.

Melton, R. (1996). Learning Outcomes for Higher Education: Some Key Issues. British Journal of Educational Studies, 44(4), 409-425.

Northwood, D. O. (2013) Learning outcomes -some reflections on their value and potential drawbacks. World Transactions on Technology and Engineering Education, 11(3), 137-142.

Nunley, C., Bers, T., & Manning, T. (2011). Learning Outcomes Assessment in Community Colleges. Occasional Paper 10. National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment. Champaign, IL.

Otter, S. (1992). Learning Outcomes in Higher Education. London, United Kingdom: Department of Employment, Further Education Unit, Development of Adult Continuing Education.

Reindal, S. M. (2013). Bildung, the Bologna Process and Kierkegaard’s Concept of Subjective Thinking. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 32(5), 533-549.

Sadler, D. R. (2007). Perils in the meticulous specification of goals and assessment criteria. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 14(3), 387-392.

Torrance, H. (2007). Assessment as learning? How the use of explicit learning objectives, assessment criteria and feedback in post‐secondary education and training can come to dominate learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 14(3), 281-294.

Torrance, H. (2012). Formative assessment at the crossroads: conformative, deformative and transformative assessment. Oxford Review of Education, 38(3), 323-342.

von-Glaserfeld, E. (1984). An introduction to radical constructivism. In P. Watzalawick (Ed.), The Invented Reality (pp. 17-40). New York, NY: Norton.

von Glaserfeld, E. (1995a). A constructivist approach to teaching. In L. P. Steffe, & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in Education (pp. 3-16). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

von Glaserfeld, E. (1995b). Radical Constructivism. A way of knowing and learning. London, United Kingdom: Routledge-Falmer.

Watson, P. (2002). The role and integration of learning outcomes into the educational process. Active Learning in Higher Education, 3(3), 205-219.


EDUPIJ is indexed in ERIC now.

We are delighted to announce that Educational Process: International Journal has been included in ERIC - Education Resources Information Center (Coverage: Volume 8, 2019 & forward).


EDUPIJ is included in The Philosopher’s Index (Coverage: Volume 5, 2016 & forward).

The Philosopher’s Index is the premiere bibliographic database covering worldwide research in all subject areas of philosophy.

Thank you so much to the editorial board members, authors and reviewers for their contribution to Educational Process: International Journal.