OBE结果为导向教授教化理解(英文).doc

以学习成果为导向的体会 冯天泽 （芬兰阿尔托大学教学培训体会） by Greg Feng August 31st 2012 I spent much time reading three papers respectively written by Xu, R. 2004. “Chinese mainland students’ experiences of teaching and learning at a Chinese university”, Parpala et al. (2010). “Students’ approaches to learning and their experiences of the teaching-learning environment in different disciplines” and Allan, J. 1996. “Learning outcomes in Higher Education. Studies in Higher Education” . After reading these three paper I think it important to clarify briefly three terms which I often come across when reading “Outcome learning, surface and deep learning approaches: To my understanding an “outcome”, which is different from”aim” or “objective” is simply a result or consequence of an action or process. A learning outcome is what results from a learning process. Intended learning outcomes are statements that predict what learners will have gained as a result of learning. From the students’perspective, the outcomes approach communicates what they are expected to be able to do and the criteria that will be used to assess them. In outcome-based learning, all school programs and instructional efforts are designed to have produced specific, lasting results in students by the time they leave school. According to William G. Spady (1994), outcome-based education (OBE) means clearly focusing and organizing everything in an educational system around what is essential for all students to be able to do successfully at the end of their learning experiences. In Parpala and Xu, R ‘s paper , deep and surface learning approaches are mentioned . The two approaches are derived from original empirical research by Marton and since elaborated by Ramsden (1992), Biggs (1987, 1993) and Entwistle (1981). Students applying a surface approach concentrate on the text itself, whereas those aiming at a deeper level focus on the meaning of the text. Although learners may be classified as deep or surface, t