Writing a Program Vocational Learning Outcome is one of the places where your familiarity with Outcomes-Based Learning will come in handy. Unlike course outcomes, program outcomes should focus on what GRADUATES of your program should be able to do.

You will spend "Meet-Up" 1 creating, finessing, and finalizing your PVLOs. If your program already has PVLOs, this material will help you to evaluate your level of satisfaction with the current state of the PVLOs. Please keep in mind that the actual writing of your PVLOs will occur in "Meet-Up" 1: this meeting will include your curriculum team and the Curriculum Specialist and will encourage constructive dialogue about the issues and ideas you identify in this module.

To prepare for that meeting there are some resources you should make contact with in order to understand the requirements for writing an acceptable PVLO.

1. Bloom's Taxonomy
2. Framework for Program Instruction
3. Job Postings

Bloom's Taxonomy gives us a lens to understand the mastery of knowledge and skill acquisition. Using the backward design approach we can follow our graduate backward semester by semester as they move through various courses, including work-integrated learning experiences, consolidating knowledge and skills they practice, gradually becoming more "expert" through the teaching and learning experiences we create for them. Bloom's Taxonomy gives us a framework to do so, choosing upper-level Bloom's categories and verbs for courses in the later semesters of their credential, and lower-level Bloom's verbs for semesters where students are introduced to new skills and concepts they are exposed to for the first time.

PVLOs are written using the Bloom Taxonomy model of classifying learning objectives and focusing on the upper-level categories across all 3 domains (Cognitive, Psychomotor, Affective). Depending on the focus of your program, you may have PVLOs which focus on one or all of these domains. ​

Cognitive Domain (intellect-knowledge-think)

An adjusted model of Bloom's Taxonomy (1956) Cognitive Domain was produced by Anderson & Krathwhol in which the levels five and six (synthesis & evaluation) were inverted and all the levels became verbs, suggesting that learning is an active process (Anderson & Krathwohl, A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, 2001). This is why you will see different versions of this Cognitive Domain model. While the debate continues as to the order of levels five and six, the revised version is gaining wider acceptance overall.

[INSERT GREEN TABLE HERE]

Affective Domain (emotions-attitude-feel)

Bloom's Taxonomy’s second domain, the Affective Domain, was detailed by Bloom, Krathwhol and Masia (1964, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Vol. II, The Affective Domain). Bloom's theory advocates this structure and sequence for developing attitude which is also now commonly expressed in the modern field of personal development as 'beliefs.'

[INSERT BLUE TABLE HERE]

Psychomotor Domain (physical-skills-do)

The Psychomotor Domain was established to address skills development relating to the physical dimensions of accomplishing a task. The concept of 'motor' skills extends beyond the originally traditionally imagined manual and physical skills. Consider using this domain even if you think your environment is covered adequately by the Cognitive and Affective Domains. Whatever the situation, it is likely that the Psychomotor Domain is significant.

[INSERT PURPLE TABLE HERE]

The information above is based on RH Dave's version of the Psychomotor Domain (Developing and Writing Behavioral Objectives, 1970). The theory was first presented at a Berlin conference 1967, hence you may see Dave's model attributed to 1967 or 1970. For more information visit this website: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/Bloom/original_cognitive_version.html 

A college is to award credentials at the successful completion of programs of instruction consistent with the Credentials Framework. Part of this Framework identifies the appropriate breadth and depth each credential type should encompass. When writing your PVLOs they should address the level of breadth and depth expected for your credential.  You should think about this in the specific wording of the PVLO.

[INSERT framework-for-prgrams-of-instruction_orig.png HERE]

For degree programs, there is a comprehensive list of degree level standards that need to be reflected in your credential.  It can be helpful to review these standards in relation to those above to get a feel for the difference in level between diplomas, advanced diplomas, graduate certificates and degrees. You can find the abridged version of the Degree Level Standards below.

[INSERT abridged_degree_level_standard.docx HERE]

Making Sure Your Graduate Can See Themselves in Employment Options

The final step in considering what your PVLOs should be and how they should be written would be to consider the language and expectations used in the current job market in which your graduates would find themselves. One of the best ways to do this is to review current career services for the relevant job postings for your graduates. Most program areas will know them best places to look for employment in the respective fields, however, if you are stuck for places to look you can refer to the most recent jobposting websites.

Program-level outcomes should focus on what the graduate of your program should be able to do. A program-level outcome often describes a complex and integrated knowledge and skills set that is then further broken down into your course learning outcomes. To determine whether a concept or skill set is at the level of a program outcome, think about whether you would find it's component parts in multiple courses throughout your credential.

Below is an example of how a communication PLO might be integrated into multiple courses across a credential:​

[INSERT good-olo_orig.jpg IMAGE HERE]

When writing your program outcomes you should ensure they are:

1. Observable or measurable: the achievement of the outcome should be something you can clearly evaluate. Be mindful of the language used in your program outcomes. Avoid vague terms such as: understand/develop an understanding of… Appreciate/develop an appreciation of…Develop an awareness/knowledge of…Able to consider…Become exposed to…Be familiar with...Recognize the importance of…
2. Discipline-specific: Although it may target some generic knowledge and skills, a program outcome should identify how their skills are used or important in your discipline. For example, if teamwork is important at a program outcome level, the content and context of the outcome should be specific to how these skills appear in graduates of your program.
3. Credential-specific: A program learning outcome should speak to the level of the credential it represents. If a program outcome is applicable to both a degree and a diploma, it is not sufficiently specific or has excessively high or low requirements