I teach at an open enrollment institution where “Outcomes” are all the rage. I can admit that the model might work well in some disciplines, but am far from convinced that it works well for all. We continually assess to make sure all students are learning what they’re supposed to be learning. I have a few problems with this:
1. Given the fact that faculty have no control over our inputs (quality of students), the unreasonableness of expecting us to move whole classes to a predetermined end-point in a predetermined amount of time forces us to water down our outcomes so we have something we know is achievable. In my opinion, this forces us to offer what I consider to be less than a real college experience.
2. I teach religion and philosophy. Students need to learn basic facts and gain understanding of important concepts. But I also want them to develop attitudes and dispositions that don’t lend themselves to the required quantification.
3. I increasingly find myself to be a heretic. Our institutional belief, mirroring some segments of the broader culture, is that anyone can learn anything. Given this conviction, when a student fails to learn, the fault MUST lie with the teaching. I stubbornly resist both this conviction and the inference.