1. CONSTRUCTIVE ALIGNMENT
ADIBAH BINTI ABDUL LATIF
QRiM UTM

2. 1 Staff 1 Question

3. OUTCOMES Level Of Outcomes What students able to do
PROGRAMME EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES
PEO
Level Of Outcomes
3 to 5 years after graduation
PROGRAMME LEARNING OUTCOMES
PLO
Upon graduation
COURSE LEARNING OUTCOME
CLO
After completing each course
UNIT LEARNING OUTCOME
ULO
After completing each unit

4. CONSTRUCTIVE
ALIGNMENT

5. CONSTRUCTIVE ALIGNMENT
Constructive = Constructivist theory that learners using their own activity to construct their knowledge as interpreted through their own existing schemata.
Alignment = Principle in curriculum theory that assessment tasks should be aligned to what it is intended to be learned , as in criterion referenced assessment.
What the student does is actually more
important in determining what is learned
Than what the teacher does

6. The good teaching is getting most students to
Adlina
The good teaching is getting most students to
use the level of cognitive processes needed to
achieve the intended learning outcomes that
the more academic students use spontaneously
Zaquan
Adapted, Biggs [2011]

7. 3 2 1 What the student does and how that relates to teaching
What the teacher is doing rather than what student has to deal with
Differences in learning are attributed to differences between students.
What the student does? 3
What the teacher does? 2
What the student is ? 1
LEVELS OF THINKING ABOUT TEACHING

8. STEPS ON CONSTRUCTIVE ALIGNMENT
Graduate Attribute
Program Learning Outcome
Course Learning Outcome
Topic / Unit Learning Outcome

9. UTM GRADUATE ATTRIBUTE
COMMUNICATING SKILLS
(Kemahiran Berkomunikasi) CS
Thinking Skills
(Kemahiran Berfikir) TH
Scholarship
(Kesarjanaan) SC
Team working skills
(Kemahiran kerja berpasukan) TW
Adaptability
(Kebolehsuaian) AD
Global Citizen
(Warga Global) GC
Enterprising Skills
(Kemahiran Berdaya Usaha) ES

10. PLO Kluster Kejuruteraan

11. PLO kluster sains sosial dan Sains Teknologi(UG)

12. PLO bagi Pasca Siswazah
Bil
PLO
Kod 1
Advanced Knowledge
AKW 2
Research Skills RS 3
Critical Thinking and Problem Solving
CTPS 4
Ethics, values, professionalism EM 5
Communication CS 6
Lifelong Learning LL 7
Social Skills SS 8
Team working TS 9
Leadership LS 10
Information management IM 11
Managerial and Entrepreneurial ME
core
Optional

13. Tambahan dan Taburan PLO

14. COURSE INFORMATION UTM 2018

15. COURSE INFORMATION UTM 2018
Dalam penulisan course synopsis dicadangkan supaya merumuskan intipati penting
Kursus dan kemahiran generik yang ditaksir dalam kursus.

16. COURSE INFORMATION UTM 2018

17. Program Learning Outcome Course Learning Outcome
DEVELOP COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES
Graduate Attribute
Program Learning Outcome
Course Learning Outcome
Scholarship
[SC] Pelajar berkebolehan mensintesis pengetahuan dalam bidang pengukuran dan penilaian secara sistematik
[CLO3] Develop 2 sets of classroom test by applying the concept of validity and reliability
Graduate Attribute
Program Learning Outcome
Course Learning Outcome
Program Learning

18. CLO’S MUST BE S.M.A.R.T DEVELOP COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES
PESIFIC ; to one learning behaviour
EASURABLE ; includes the criteria for success
CTIONABLE; can be demonstrated with evidence / observable
ELEVANT; to future experience or workplace
IMED; to be achieved within certain time constraints

19. DEVELOP COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES

20. DEVELOP COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES

22. A B C D 3 COMPONENTS OF CLO DEVELOP COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES
At the end of the course, students should be able to evaluate the quality of two examination papers for Multiple Choice Question and Essay question based on Classical Test Theory analysis. A B C D
CONDITION
AUDIENCE
BEHAVIOR /
VERB
DEGREE/
STANDARD

23. DEVELOP COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES
VERB C
CONDITION S
STANDARD

24. DEVELOP COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES

25. DEVELOP COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES

26. DEVELOP COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES

27. DEVELOP COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES

28. ISU PENULISAN CLO
Mempunyai terlalu banyak CLO dalam satu kursus. Ada sehingga 14 CLO
Pensyarah kurang kemahiran mensintesiskan silibus ke dalam bentuk outcome yang boleh diintegrasikan
Pensyarah tidak memulakan verb yang diukur sekurang-kurangnya dengan application level dalam taksonomi Bloom
Pensyarah yang menggunakan MCQ dalam final exam merasa sukar untuk mappingkan item dalam soalan exam dengan CLO.

29. ISU PENULISAN CLO
Pensyarah tidak revised CLO, hanya menggunakan CLO sedia ada dan tidak menggunakan konsep OBE
CLO tidak align dengan Aktiviti dan Pentaksiran
CLO dibina tanpa sebarang data yang meyakinkan (contoh perbincangan degan panel luar/stakeholder dan tanpa data penyelidikan daripada pencapaian pelajar)

30. ISU PENULISAN CLO
Pensyarah menggunakan dua verb bagi satu domain pembelajaran yang sama
Pensyarah gagal membezakan setiap aras dalam domain pembelajaran samada kognitif, afektif dan psikomotor
Pensyarah terlalu terikat dengan “keyword” dalam Taksonomi pendidikan

31. Kajian Kes
Tidak sejajar di antara CLO dan aras taksonomi

32. CADANGAN
Kuiz, test, dan peperiksaan akhir dirangkum dalam satu CLO sahaja.
CLO lain memfokuskan pentaksiran secara praktikal dan kemahiran generik

33. Kajian kes Bagaimanakah sebenarnya bilangan item ditetapkan?
Berasarkan jam kuliah? Pemberat CLO? Ini kerana jumlah
Item yang sama sahaja bagi jumlah jam kuliah yang berbeza

34. CADANGAN Aplikasikan formula yang dicadangkan
Masukkan hanya topik yang paling signifikan terutama bagi soalan berbentuk subjektif

35. Kajian Kes Tidak salah sebenarnya bagi peringkat sijil / diploma
untuk mempunyai CLO /
aras item yang melebihi
aras Aplikasi

36. CADANGAN Gunakan satu sahaja CLO bagi mengukur PLO1 (Pengetahuan)
Aplikasikan konsep penjajaran konstruktif.

37. Kajian Kes Soalan MCQ bukanlah dibina untuk aras mudah sahaja.
Malah bagi ujian berbentuk sumatif
seharusnya memenuhi konsep
normal distribution

38. CADANGAN Kemahiran dalam pembinaan item peperiksaan
Memenuhi prinsip pembinaan item

39. Kajian kes
Antara contoh CLO yang tidak sesuai diukur dengan ujian bertulis

40. CADANGAN Tidak semua CLO perlu diukur dengan peperiksaan
Bina satu CLO khas untuk pengetahuan (PLO1)

41. Kajian Kes
Item ini bukanlah item berbentuk struktur

42. CADANGAN
Pensyarah perlu dapat membezakan apa yang dimaksudkan dengan item jawapan pendek, respon terhad, respon terbuka dan soalan berstruktur.

43. Kajian Kes
Bagaimana penetapan dan pemilihan topik bagi ujian berbentuk esei?
Adakah perlu melibatkan semua topik?
Bagaimana dari segi aras kesukaran?

44. Kajian Kes Instead of letakkan bilangan item, letakkan nombor soalan,
Contohnya soalan 1 (a), 1(b), 2(a),

45. Kajian Kes
Tiada jajaran dengan CLO
Tiada pecahan aras kesukaran item

46. Practical skills should not be assessed by examination

50. COURSE INFORMATION UTM 2018

51. Student Learning Time 1 kredit bersamaan dengan 40 jam kredit
Diagihkan mengikut kesesuaian perlaksanaan proses pengajaran dan pembelajaran
Penetapan jam kredit adalah selari dengan weight pentaksiran
Contoh:- CLO 2 menggunakan pentaksiran individual presentation dan diberi markah sebanyak 10 markah
Maka (10/100)*80 (jam kredit) = 8jam
Maka agihkan 8 jam untuk F2F (L/T/P/O), NF2F secara guidance atau non guidance

52. KEMAHIRAN GENERIK
Bukan bersifat ordinal, maka satu CLO boleh lebih daripada 1 operational definition yang ada dalam kemahiran generic tersebut
Perlu diingatkan bahawa kemahiran generik bukan bersifat knowledge dan technical skills.
Contoh: Jika thinking skills bukan penyelesaian masalah dalam masalah matematik di dalam ujian. Tetapi thinking skills semasa melaksanakan kajian / projek / masalah di luar silibus pembelajaran.

53. OPERATIONAL DEFINITION PLO (UG)

54. CS (COMMUNICATING SKILLS)

55. CS (COMMUNICATING SKILLS)

56. TH (THINKING SKILLS)

57. TH (THINKING SKILLS)

58. SC (SCHOLARSHIP)

59. SC (SCHOLARSHIP)

60. TW (TEAM WORKING)

61. TW (TEAM WORKING)

62. AD (ADAPTABILITY)

63. AD (ADAPTABILITY)

64. GC (GLOBAL CITIZEN)

65. GC (GLOBAL CITIZEN)

66. ES (ENTERPRISING SKILLS)

67. ES (ENTERPRISING SKILLS)

68. OPERATIONAL DEFINITION PLO (PG)

69. ADVANCED KNOWLEDGE

70. RESEARCH SKILLS

71. CRITICAL THINKING

72. ETHICS, VALUES, PROFESSIONALISME

73. COMMUNICATION

74. LIFE LONG LEARNING

75. SOCIAL SKILLS

76. TEAMWORKING

77. LEADERSHIP

78. INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

79. MANAGERIAL AND ENTREPRENEURIAL

81. As conclusion…

82. Need to learn about
Learning Taxonomies

83. Need to learn about
Generic Skills

84. Need to learn about
Teaching and Learning Methods

85. Need to learn about
Assessment and Evaluation

86. Distinguish between declarative knowledge and functioning knowledge
Knowledge that can be declared
Put the knowledge to work, to make it function
Performance Based Assessment
exams

87. What works best in higher education
Factor
Effect size
Student self report grades
1.44
Providing formative evaluation to lecturers
0.90
Teacher clarity
0.75
Feedback
0.74
Spaced ‘vs’ mass practice
0.73
Metacognitive strategies
0.71
Creativity programmes
0.69
Self verbalization
0.65
Professional development
0.64
Problem solving teaching
0.62
Not labelling students
0.61
Cooperative learning
0.59
Study skills
Mastery learning
Worked examples
0.58
Hattie [2009a] synthesizes over 800 meta analyses
Involving 50,000+ studies and about 250+ millions
students

88. Seven characters of a good learning context
Metacognitive control
Relevant learner activity
Formative feedback
Appropriate motivation
Interconnected knowledge
Social learning
Teaching quality

89. From Grade Oriented to Outcomes Oriented
From Content Based to Ability Based
From Lecturer Centred to Student Centred

90. Special Thanks to Prof Shahrin bin Mohammad PM Dr Shafry Bin Abd Rahim
Tn Hj Yahya bin Samian
For all the materials shared in this power point