Summary
Description of the concept of learning outcomes viewed from the Fontys ICT educational vision and curriculum.

By a learning outcome we mean the following:

• a description of visible functioning;
• a measurable result of an (independent) learning pathway;
• on the basis of which it can be determined at what level and in what context the qualification was developed.

A term that is closely related to learning outcomes is constructive alignment (Biggs & Tang, 2011). Constructive alignment means that there must always be a connection between:

1. the learning outcomes
2. (learning path independent) assessment
3. the learning activities

According to the principle of constructive alignment, the design and development of education is also carried out in the specified order mentioned above.

Formulating learning outcomes could contribute to making education more flexible (Rinnooy Kan, 2014; OCW, 2016). In the educational vision of Fontys ICT, student centred education, it says that we train for each individual student. In order to make this possible, we want to be able to offer customised learning pathways.

This will result in fewer and fewer fixed learning pathways. You can see learning outcomes as the dot on the horizon. What do you want students to be able to show at the end of a period? Which functioning? Of course, this requires knowledge, skills and attitudes. How the student arrives at the learning outcome is free. This makes the learning path to the outcome variable (more flexible).

A learning outcome should be able to be assessed independently of your learning path. This leaves room for the student to do his own reconnaissance. Of course you can map out a path for students, it's about leaving the space to students to take their freedom and take a different path. When a learning outcome is formulated very specifically, the latter is almost impossible.

Learning outcomes must provide security. In addition, they must make room for flexibility. This is a field of tension, but with the help of, among other things, the Tuning scheme a balance can be found here. It should be borne in mind that:

1. the learning outcomes should be able to be used in their own specific, concrete situation;
2. the learning outcome should be achievable with that situation;
3. the learning outcome must be demonstrated by a relevant product or performance.

Compared to learning objectives, learning outcomes often indicate even more specifically what a student must be able to master. Where learning outcomes are over a longer period of time, learning objectives are formulated for the short period of time, for example one lesson or one week. In the case of learning objectives, the path to the learning objective is the same for every student. The learning objective can be demonstrated by walking the path mapped out by the lecturer. There is more room for this in the case of learning outcomes.

Performance indicators are also not the same as the learning outcomes. The performance indicators from the HBO-i framework describe what a student should be able to show at the end of the propaedeutic phase, core phase or end phase. The indicators are defined without context and are therefore more global and abstract than learning outcomes. The time span for demonstrating a performance indicator is larger than that of a learning outcome. Learning outcomes define the exit profile of a unit of study and are thus linked to credits. Performance indicators define the final level of a phase of a study programme.

In the case of demand-based, course-based and research-based teaching method, learning outcomes are defined in advance by the study programme and linked to the HBO-i competency framework. In open learning, students define their own dynamic competence profile (exit level) under supervision. They set their own criteria for challenges (projects), which contribute to growth within the competence framework.

• Biggs, J. & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for Quality Learning at University: what the student does. Maidenhead: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
• Commissie Rinnooy Kan (Advisory Committee 'Flexibel hoger onderwijs voor werkenden'). (2014). Flexibel hoger onderwijs voor volwassenen: adviesrapport. Den Haag: Ministerie van OCW.
• OCW, (2016). Handreiking pilots flexibilisering hoger onderwijs. Den Haag. Ministerie van OCW.