Constructive Alignment of Higher Education Curricula

H. J. Abejuela, Hannah T. Castillon, Marlie Joy G. Sigod
{"title":"Constructive Alignment of Higher Education Curricula","authors":"H. J. Abejuela, Hannah T. Castillon, Marlie Joy G. Sigod","doi":"10.57200/apjsbs.v20i0.288","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A constructive alignment is an approach to outcome-based education which involves examining curriculum, discipline, and/or course level initiatives. This research sought to assess the match among the institutional outcomes, program outcomes, performance indicators, assessment, evaluation methods, and standards (IPOPIAEMS) in 20 undergraduate curricula. The researchers mainly used qualitative research methods like document analysis, curriculum mapping, and online-focused group discussion. Findings revealed that there is a high alignment of the curricula in the University. This means that five out of six dimensions components are constructively aligned.  During the OFGD, the participants underscored the significance of using the institution's vision, mission, and goals as anchorage in crafting the institutional outcomes. Additionally, the majority of the participants highlighted that they based their performance indicators on CHED’s policies, standards, and guidelines (PSG). Regarding the participants' experiences in aligning their performance indicators and assessment methods, the programs' syllabi were valuable in determining their assessment methods for their PIs. One difficulty though was delineating between assessment and evaluation since both denote processes of learning measurement. However, while the former entails appraising a student's level of performance, the latter involves gauging the degree to which outcomes are attained based on a set of standards. In terms of the outcomes’ relevance to 21st century learning, they were found to be relevant to most of the seven cluster competencies except for computing technology which is given the least attention in higher education curricula. Since there is a high constructive curriculum alignment in the University, it is therefore concluded that the five elements of the curriculum, namely, the institutional outcomes (with the vision and mission of the HEI as an anchorage), program outcomes unique to a particular specialization, performance indicators, assessment, and standards are highly coherent except for the evaluation methods. It is recommended that evaluation method shall be continually calibrated to ensure its coherence with the other dimensions and that computing technology shall be mainstreamed in the curricula across all programs. \n ","PeriodicalId":233251,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia Pacific Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.57200/apjsbs.v20i0.288","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A constructive alignment is an approach to outcome-based education which involves examining curriculum, discipline, and/or course level initiatives. This research sought to assess the match among the institutional outcomes, program outcomes, performance indicators, assessment, evaluation methods, and standards (IPOPIAEMS) in 20 undergraduate curricula. The researchers mainly used qualitative research methods like document analysis, curriculum mapping, and online-focused group discussion. Findings revealed that there is a high alignment of the curricula in the University. This means that five out of six dimensions components are constructively aligned.  During the OFGD, the participants underscored the significance of using the institution's vision, mission, and goals as anchorage in crafting the institutional outcomes. Additionally, the majority of the participants highlighted that they based their performance indicators on CHED’s policies, standards, and guidelines (PSG). Regarding the participants' experiences in aligning their performance indicators and assessment methods, the programs' syllabi were valuable in determining their assessment methods for their PIs. One difficulty though was delineating between assessment and evaluation since both denote processes of learning measurement. However, while the former entails appraising a student's level of performance, the latter involves gauging the degree to which outcomes are attained based on a set of standards. In terms of the outcomes’ relevance to 21st century learning, they were found to be relevant to most of the seven cluster competencies except for computing technology which is given the least attention in higher education curricula. Since there is a high constructive curriculum alignment in the University, it is therefore concluded that the five elements of the curriculum, namely, the institutional outcomes (with the vision and mission of the HEI as an anchorage), program outcomes unique to a particular specialization, performance indicators, assessment, and standards are highly coherent except for the evaluation methods. It is recommended that evaluation method shall be continually calibrated to ensure its coherence with the other dimensions and that computing technology shall be mainstreamed in the curricula across all programs.  
高等教育课程的建设性衔接
建设性调整是一种基于结果的教育方法,包括检查课程、学科和/或课程水平的举措。本研究旨在评估20个本科课程中机构成果、项目成果、绩效指标、评估、评估方法和标准(IPOPIAEMS)之间的匹配。研究人员主要采用定性研究方法,如文献分析、课程映射和在线小组讨论。调查结果显示,该大学的课程高度一致。这意味着六个维度组件中的五个是建设性对齐的。在OFGD期间,与会者强调了将机构的愿景、使命和目标作为制定机构成果的基础的重要性。此外,大多数参与者强调,他们的绩效指标是基于CHED的政策、标准和指导方针(PSG)。关于参与者在调整绩效指标和评估方法方面的经验,课程的教学大纲在确定其个人绩效指标的评估方法方面很有价值。然而,一个困难是在评估和评价之间进行界定,因为两者都表示学习测量的过程。然而,前者需要评估学生的表现水平,而后者则需要根据一套标准来衡量取得成果的程度。就结果与21世纪学习的相关性而言,他们被发现与七个集群能力中的大多数相关,除了计算技术在高等教育课程中受到的关注最少。由于该大学具有高度建设性的课程一致性,因此得出的结论是,课程的五个要素,即机构成果(以高等教育学院的愿景和使命为基础),特定专业的项目成果,绩效指标,评估和标准,除了评估方法外,都是高度一致的。建议应不断校准评估方法,以确保其与其他方面的一致性,并将计算技术纳入所有项目的课程主流。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信