Course Design through Constructive Alignment

Constructive Alignment is an approach to course design which begins with the end in mind (i.e. what should students know and be able to demonstrate at the end of the course).  It assumes that when intended course learning outcomes, assessment methods, and teaching and learning activities are intentionally aligned, that the outcomes of learning are improved substantially (Blumberg, 2009). The process of constructive alignment emphasizes that students are central to the creation of meaning, and must be provided with opportunities to actively select, and cumulatively construct their own knowledge (Biggs, 1996).  Meyers and Nulty (2009, p.567) provide 5 curriculum recommendations for designing a course based upon Biggs’ approach to constructive alignment.

To maximise the quality of learning outcomes, we, as academics, need to develop courses in ways that provide students with teaching and learning materials, tasks and experiences which:

  1. are authentic, real-world and relevant;
  2. are constructive, sequential and interlinked;
  3. require students to use and engage with progressively higher order cognitive processes;
  4. are aligned with each other and the desired learning outcomes; and
  5. provide challenge, interest and motivation to learn.


The effect of applying these principles is to [create a] learning system in ways that require students to adopt a deep learning approach in order to meet the course’s assessment requirements – which, in turn, meets the desired learning outcomes.   They further emphasize that teaching is inherently complex, and that these principles must be adapted to each instructor’s individual teaching approaches, strengths and to the realities that we face in the many varying contexts in higher education.   Fink’s (2003) 5 principles of course design also provide some practical insight, which can be adapted to the many varying context that we may face:

  1. Challenge higher level of learning, by defining learning objectives at a high cognitive level
  2. Use active forms of learning
  3. Give frequent and immediate feedback
  4. Use structured sequence of teaching and learning activities to scaffold learning
  5. Use objective and fair systems of grading and assessment


Backwards Course Design

Description: Course outcomes.jpeg

There is little doubt that individual instructor’s can have an enormous impact on the quality of students’ learning experience and on the outcomes they achieve, “…high level engagement ought not be left to serendipity, or to individual student brilliance, but should be actively encouraged by the teacher” (Biggs, 1996, p. 353).   The process of constructive alignment begins by defining clearly the course-specific learning outcomes, such that both the students and instructor are aware of the essential knowledge and abilities that they should be able to demonstrate at the end of the course.  Once the intended learning outcomes are clearly defined, the feedback and assessment methods that provide an opportunity for the students and instructor to formatively and summatively assess their achievement of these intended outcomes should be articulated and developed. Meyers and Nulty (2009) suggest that assessment tasks should hold together and sequence all other course components.  The final step in this dynamic cycle is to plan the teaching and learning activities that best support an active and deep approach to learning.  Knight (2001) describes this stage as drawing together the processes, encounters and engagements that best make for effective learning, given both the context and the subject-matter content.  

Resources

Course Learning Outcomes Alignment Table (download word doc)

This table presents a framework to communicate the constructive alignment of course-level learning outcomes with assessments, teaching and learning activities, as well as how the course level learning outcomes fit within the context of the program or major. This framework can be used to support course design as well as to communicate this alignment to colleagues and students.

References

Biggs, J. 1996.  Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment.  Higher Education 32:347- 364.

Blumberg, P. 2009.  Maximizing learning through course alignment and experience with different types of knowledge.  Innovative Higher Education 34:93-103.

Fink, L.D. 2003. Integrated Course Design.  The Idea Centre. Accessed at: http://www.theideacenter.org/sites/default/files/Idea_Paper_42.pdf

Knight, P.T. 2001.  Complexity and curriculum: a process approach to curriculum making.  Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 6: 369-381.

Meyers, N.M. and Nulty, D.D. 2009.  How to use (five) curriculum design principles to align authentic learning environments, assessment, students’ approach to thinking and learning outcomes.  Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 34: 565-577.