1

A Guide to Writing Programme and Module Level Learning Outcomes

Acknowledgements

We are extremely grateful to Dr Matthew Williamson of Queen Mary University of London who kindly allowed us to use and adapt the Queen Mary Learning Institute’s ‘Good Practice Guide on Writing Aims and Learning Outcomes’. Aspects of this document are also adapted from original work by Norman Jackson, James Wisdom and Malcolm Shaw (Imaginative Curriculum Project Team) and Dr Helen Cousins (Newman University).

Introduction

This is one of a series of documents produced by the Learning Enhancement and Academic Practice (LEAP) Directorate at the University of Hull which supports academic staff to develop academic programmes and modules.

Learning in higher education comprises a complex mixture of knowledge, understanding, skills and broader capabilities that can be (more or less) demonstrated and assessed. It also includes the development of values, attitudes and behaviours that are often more difficult to assess directly, but which are an important part of a student’s academic performance. The higher education system is being encouraged to be more explicit about the nature of the learning that programmes and modules are intending to promote. Through QAA requirements, for example, around the writing of programme specifications, or through the production of subject benchmark statements (see http://www.qaa.ac.uk), institutions are increasingly expected to adopt an outcomes-based approach to learning in order to explain more precisely the learning that teachers are seeking to promote. HE teachers are expected to be able to show: • how the educational outcomes for a programme and learning outcomes for a module are being

achieved; • that the assessment methods used are appropriate to test the achievement of these intended

outcomes; and • that the criteria used to judge achievement are clearly and explicitly aligned to the intended

learning outcomes. This guide is designed to help academic members of staff write more focussed and useful aims and learning outcomes for programmes and modules, to support them in the design of curriculum and assessment. It gives a background to the use of aims and outcomes, as well as defining differences in the current use of these concepts. It then goes on to consider ways in which we might write intended learning outcomes at different levels for and within programmes, as well as how these can then be linked to assessment processes. Within this guide, we use the term ‘programme’ for a complete programme of study (such as an undergraduate or taught postgraduate award) and the term ‘module’ for a unit within a programme

2

which has a package of learning contained within it. We also use the generic term ‘course’ where we wish to include both ‘programmes’ and ‘modules’ in a statement.

1 Aims, Objectives and Learning Outcomes. What are they and which ones should I use?

In the main, there are three terms which you are likely to come across in curriculum design when looking at how to encapsulate the intentions of the course or programme. These three terms are aims, objectives, and outcomes. When teachers in higher education first began trying to give formal or semi-formal guidance as to the content of their courses, they tended to use aims and objectives. However, more recently the sector has moved away from objectives towards learning outcomes. This guide focuses primarily on writing and using learning outcomes, but it begins by providing a definition of all three terms.

1.1 Aims

Programme or module aims serve as broad purposes or goals and are generally a statement of the intentions of the teacher or school when designing or running the course. They are not intended to be statements of what students will learn or do, but rather over-arching intentions of the course. At a basic level, aims are trying to answer two questions:

• What is the purpose of this programme or module? • What is the programme or module trying to achieve?

For optional modules, aims are there to help students make decisions about whether this is a module they wish to take. For compulsory modules, they are there to give the students a very brief idea of what the intention of the course is. For core modules (modules that must be passed in order to meet award regulations), aims illustrate the key nature of the module in relation to the programme students are studying.

Aims should be brief, succinct and give students a reasonable idea of what to expect from the course.

Some examples of aims might be:

1. To provide a critical overview of the state of political debate in Britain during the nineteenth century

2. To provide opportunities for the study and evaluation of the latest research in particle physics

3. To develop students’ understanding and development of clinical and communications skills with a range of stakeholders across a number of primary and secondary care settings.

1.2 Objectives

In contrast, objectives can be defined as the specific steps which will be taken as part of the curriculum to move towards meeting the module or programme aims: what the teacher or the

3

curriculum plans to achieve or cover. For instance, a learning objective associated with Aim 3, above, might be:

‘To provide students with opportunities to observe, practice and develop the skills of interviewing patients in the primary setting’.

As you can see from this example, one problem with objectives is that it can be a little difficult to distinguish them from aims, particularly when describing modules rather than programmes. This is because both aims and objectives refer to the opportunities that the teacher and the curriculum afford students, rather than what students will, themselves, have achieved.

1.3 Learning Outcomes

In contrast, Learning Outcomes describe the results of learning (and more specifically the aspects of students’ learning that tutors assess and reward formally as part of the programme of study). The move from objective-based learning (the opportunities for learning provided) and towards outcomes-based learning (the intended results of the learning process) reflects a wider sector move from a teacher-focussed approach to a more student-focussed approach to learning. Current best practice therefore encourages staff to try to re-frame objectives as learning outcomes. So, the objective stated above might now be re-framed into an outcome in the following way:

‘By the end of the course, students should have observed, gained practice in and be able to demonstrate the key skills associated with interviewing patients in the primary setting’

Whilst at one level this could be seen as a purely semantic shift, for more complex objectives it is now generally agreed that it is more helpful for students to understand what is expected of them, rather than what they will be taught or given opportunities to do. Simply put, learning outcomes are the skills, knowledge and understandings that it is intended that students should be able to demonstrate by the time the assessment processes for the course have been completed.

Programme learning outcomes are therefore direct statements of what successful students will achieve as a result of receiving their award. They are neither a wish list nor a statement of the programme content. Moreover, they are not simply an aggregation of the module learning outcomes – they should be more than the sum of their parts.

Well-designed programme learning outcomes:

• relate directly to the programme aims; • are clear and unambiguous and can be understood by staff, students and external

examiners; • reflect relevant external reference points (such as Subject Benchmark Statements and

Professional Statutory and Regulatory Body requirements); • are appropriate to the level of study as defined by the Quality Assurance Agency’s

‘Framework for Higher Education Qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland’ and the University of Hull Grading Descriptors;

• align (as appropriate) with the University of Hull Statement of Graduate Attributes.

4

The designation of constituent core modules within a programme is also particularly important in this context since programme learning outcomes should all be clearly reflected in core modules and vice-versa. Core modules, by their very nature, should be central to meeting the requirements of an award.

Module learning outcomes are more specific, and relate to what successful students will show they have achieved by successfully completing the module and its associated assessment(s). Well-designed module learning outcomes:

• are achievable and assessable; • align to the programme outcomes; • reflect relevant external reference points (such as Subject Benchmark Statements and

Professional Statutory and Regulatory Body requirements); • are appropriate to the level of study as defined by the Quality Assurance Agency’s

‘Framework for Higher Education Qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland’ and the University of Hull Grading Descriptors;

• align (as appropriate) with the University of Hull Statement of Graduate Attributes.

The Quality Assurance Agency’s (QAA) guidelines for students on achieving academic credit in higher education in England provide a clear explanation as to why module level learning outcomes, in particular, must be both achievable and assessable:

In order to be awarded credit for a module/unit or programme, you have to meet the learning outcomes by completing the assessment to a minimum standard (a pass). Most assessments are marked not simply on a pass/fail basis but using schemes which grade performance. Performance above the minimum standard is recognised not by the award of additional credits but by higher marks which are awarded on a scale reflecting levels of achievement. (QAA, 2009: 11).

Programme and module level learning outcomes are likely to be the two main types of learning outcomes that you have come across as they are contained in all programme and module descriptors at the University of Hull. However, once you are comfortable with the purpose of learning outcomes and how best to write them, you may also wish to create end-of-stage learning outcomes (i.e. Level 4, Level 5 etc.) and teaching session learning outcomes. Further discussion of these various types of learning outcomes and their purpose can be found in Section 4.1.

It is important to note that if outcomes have been written with more of an eye to the management or quality assurance uses of outcomes (and academics feel they are going through the motions of writing learning outcomes for quality or programme approval processes), or if they are written by a member of staff who has more of an understanding of the mechanisms and demands of higher education than the students do, then learning outcomes may become unfit for purpose. Remember that learning outcomes are also for student consumption and you should keep your students in mind at all times when writing them.

It is also worth remembering that not having learning outcomes can be more constraining than having them. As Baume (2009) states, without explicit and visible outcomes, students and teams of

5

academic staff involved in modules or programmes may develop their own particular views about what is expected of them and, in doing so, may build their own constraints. This can be extremely restrictive and complex as because these expectations are often invisible, implicit and personal, it is hard to work out what they are, how to improve on them and how to create a shared understanding.

This said, outcomes are not the whole story. They should not be seen as a replacement for a detailed syllabus or guidance, but as a useful constituent part of programme and module design. The underlying assumptions and expectations of study at university level (and at the different levels therein) should also be explained or passed on to students. Writing useful learning outcomes should not be seen as an attempt to encapsulate everything that the students need to know about the course!

2 What is the relationship between learning outcomes, course design and course assessment? Exploring the outcomes-based approach to learning.

One main reason for developing clear learning outcomes is to help to connect and align our curriculum, our teaching, our students’ learning, and the assessments we set. This may seem axiomatic, but it’s useful to remember that developing learning outcomes for courses should not be seen as an end in itself; they are an integral part of whole curriculum design and our teaching. This integration of outcomes with assessment and teaching is commonly referred to as ‘constructive alignment’ (Biggs, 1999). What this means in practice is keeping three key questions in mind when thinking about designing your curriculum and associated assessment:

• What should the students know or be able to do by the end of the course? • Which methods and resources will I use in my teaching to encourage students to develop

the knowledge, understanding and skills necessary to achieve these outcomes? • Which assessment tasks and criteria will help me and my students know that they have met

the intended outcomes?

If we use these three questions each time we undertake any form of curriculum development or design, then learning outcomes by default move away from being seen as a managerial/quality-focussed tool to a useful tool for both students and staff: as a means of defining and driving student learning. They can provide both students and staff with a clearer understanding of the skills and knowledge that will be assessed during or after undertaking a course. As such, all learning outcomes should be assessable and should directly relate to the aims of the programme or module. In turn, the assessments that you set should directly offer a way of meeting the learning outcomes of your module.

As stated in Section 1.3, while the threshold approach to writing learning outcomes is not always helpful per se (arguably encouraging ‘learning to the test’), different thresholds of achievement are useful to consider when learning outcomes are used as the starting point for developing and defining grade-related assessment criteria. Module assessment criteria should be designed to help students to recognise how the assessment will be graded at different threshold levels. This can be done by combining the University of Hull Grading Descriptors and the module learning outcomes to create a range of grade-related assessment criteria. As a worked example, Figure 1 takes two

6

learning outcomes from a Level 4 English Literature Module and indicates the threshold levels at which students would need to work to achieve the grades listed (in relation to the University of Hull Grading Descriptors).

7

Learning Outcomes:

By the end of the module students should be able to: 70-79% 60-69% 50-59%

Show understanding of critical terminology (from the required reading) through direct explanation and apply it confidently in written work.

The use of critical terminology in the analysis of the text is excellent. Examples and discussion show a depth of understanding. It is explained and evaluated extremely well with reference to secondary sources. The discussion which considers the usefulness of the technique is of high quality.

Critical terminology is used accurately and to good effect with examples and discussion showing clear understanding. There is evidence of good evaluative comment regarding the technique and its effects. Secondary reading supports the discussion and definition of terms well.

Critical terminology is used accurately to describe features of the text and additional comment on the terminology shows satisfactory understanding of the purpose or effect of the device. Secondary reading may be limited but where used it supports the discussion and definition of terms.

Discuss and critically appraise potential alternative interpretations of the text.

An excellent range of different possibilities for interpretation is raised and evaluated. There is high quality evidence of insight into how these different interpretations arise and their value for interpreting the text (personal subjectivity; critical approach etc).

Different interpretations are clearly made. There is good evidence of insight into how they might arise and of evaluation of their value for interpreting the text.

Some different interpretations are described but there is little or unconvincing attempt to evaluate how these arise or their value in interpreting the text.

Figure 1: Example of Grade-related Threshold Assessment Criteria

8

3 What about unintended learning outcomes, and can learning outcomes remain un-assessed?

One key issue identified with the shift from objective-based to an outcomes-based approach is that we can only articulate ‘intended’ learning outcomes. All academics will be able to provide examples of unintended outcomes which individual students, or groups of students, have attained during courses, which they could not have foreseen. This is not surprising, as each individual student and student group will bring a range of skills, knowledge and understanding to their learning. Learning in Higher Education is, by its very nature, an opportunity to think differently, create new ideas and deal with the unexpected. While these unintended outcomes are not predictable, they should certainly be acknowledged and, where possible, rewarded or celebrated. If you find that year after year the same unintended outcomes arise and are seen as a positive addition, it may be worth revisiting your intended learning outcomes to incorporate these new additions. In such circumstances you may find it useful to ask your students to work with you and your programme external examiner to develop the learning outcomes to better reflect the learning that occurs.

The question as to whether learning outcomes can remain un-assessed is a thorny one and up for much debate. Ultimately the decisions that you make about which learning outcomes should be assessed and which not will depend on a range of factors: for example, the nature of the discipline or area of practice in which you are working including any professional or statutory body requirements; and whether a particular learning outcome has already been assessed in another module and does not need assessing a further time. Ultimately these are matters of academic judgement and the LEAP Academic Practice team are available to advise if you are uncertain whether to assess a learning outcome or not.

4 Developing your learning outcomes

4.1 How do I develop and write useful learning outcomes?

The best learning outcomes are those that describe what the typical student will have learned by the time the course has been completed, and can be assessed to measure the extent to which students have achieved this learning. In short, a less helpful outcome would describe the understanding that students are expected to have developed (e.g. ‘by the end of this module, students will understand Newton’s Laws of Motion’) whereas a more useful one would outline how they can articulate, or demonstrate, this understanding (e.g. ‘by the end of this module, students will be able to demonstrate how Newton’s Laws of Motion can be used to investigate the movement of bodies’ can be much more easily assessed). If you cannot answer the question ‘How would this be assessed?’, then you do not have a useable learning outcome.

As stated in Section 1.3, learning outcomes should relate directly to the different circumstances in which they are being used. There are four basic circumstances in which we might want to devise learning outcomes. In each of these circumstances, you will need to write a different kind of learning outcome:

9

• for programmes as a whole, to give students an overview of the intended outcomes at the end of their degree course;

• for individual levels of a programme, to give students an understanding of how we expect them to develop during one academic year of their course, or equivalent for part-time students (NB. this is only relevant for programmes of over one year’s duration);

• for modules on a course, to show students the skills and knowledge we expect them to have acquired during a discrete unit of learning (this may be particularly connected with an individual module or a concept, idea or skill that runs through a number of modules or years of a programme);

• for individual sessions in a module, to help students grasp what the intentions of the session will be.

When writing learning outcomes the following points may be useful:

• write in the future tense (on successful completion of this programme/module, students will be able to);

• identify the most important things you want the students to learn, and try to keep the number of outcomes per module to a manageable number (around four is about right for a module; any more will be difficult to assess);

• make sure your outcomes are achievable and assessable. Think about how you might assess the outcomes as you write them and remove any which are vague, unclear or not assessable;

• use language that students will understand; • include process as well as product. Not all outcomes should assess an end product; some

should reflect the process you expect students to undertake in reaching that goal. For instance, ‘be able to write a research dissertation’ is not a helpful outcome, as it requires students to understand what the process of writing the dissertation is. Alternatively, ‘be able to plan and undertake a research project which leads to the writing of a research dissertation’ is more helpful, as it shows the process we are asking the students to undertake more clearly;

• have a balance of different types of outcome (see section 4.2) but remember that all three types may be included in one learning outcome for a module (i.e. students should be able to understand, apply and do);

• write at the appropriate level for the course (see section 4.3).

4.2 What different types of learning outcome are there?

• Knowledge-based (knowledge and understanding) - these outcomes describe the knowledge and/or understanding that students will be expected to have acquired by the end of their studies.

• Application-based (practical skills) – As well as being able to recall information and show understanding of it, learning outcomes should describe the kinds of application or transformation that students will be expected to make in relation to that information. In line

10

with the standards outlined in the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications and the University of Hull Grading Descriptors, the outcomes at higher levels should show that students should be able to engage with knowledge critically, to evaluate it, or to analyse or synthesise complex data.

• Skills-based (intellectual and transferable skills) – Learning outcomes should cover the development of skills as well as knowledge acquisition and application. If you intend to assess students’ capability in a particular skill, think about how you express that as an outcome for the course. This is particularly important with key skills that relate both to your discipline or area of practice (perhaps outlined by your PSRB) as well as to the University of Hull Statement of Graduate Attributes and those articulated in the University of Hull Employability Awards.

4.3 How do I get the level right?

One of the most important things about writing helpful learning outcomes is to ensure that outcomes are stated in language consistent with the requirements of different levels of study. This does not mean ‘dumbing down’ or patronising students, rather it means trying to use appropriate verbs and adverbs to help students better understand what is expected of them on the programme or module. While the content and wording of aims will often give an indication as to level, this may not (and strictly need not) be the case. The same aim may be construed at more than one level through the use of different learning outcomes. The outcomes taken together with the assessment criteria will be the definitive measure of level, rather than the aims or content. Often, in thinking of the level of learning, you will see Benjamin Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives cited. Developed in the 1950s, Bloom’s work in classifying cognitive ability is very helpful when writing learning outcomes, to ensure that you pitch the outcome at the right level. The main way in which the taxonomy is helpful is in giving you some active verbs to use when putting together your outcomes. Figure 2 below sets out the six levels in the taxonomy and draws on the work of Stefani (2009), Omar Garcia (Queen Mary University London), Alan Jenkins and Dave Unwin (for the National Centre for Geographic Information and Analysis; www.ncgia.ucsb.edu) and Mike Laycock (University of East London).

A couple of caveats, however. Firstly, do not take the suggested verbs as being the only ones possible, or as confined to one level of study. Some verbs we use will operate at more than one level (just with slightly different expectations). The word ‘analyse’, for example, refers to a higher order skill that students are expected to show evidence of during their programme of study, but this word can be used at Level 3 – relating to relatively simple versions of the skill as well as at Levels 4 to 7 relating to increasingly complex versions of the same skill.

Secondly, don’t expect students to be able to carry out higher level tasks without having undertaken basic levels of the tasks first. While it is perfectly possible to recall something without understanding it, it is not feasible to expect students to apply knowledge that they are not able to recall or to research for themselves. Furthermore, don’t fall into the trap of assuming that students can already operate at the lower levels on entry to University, and that we can expect them to move immediately to operating at a higher level. Even for the most complex high level courses there will

11

still be a need for students to memorise and be able to recall facts as well as interpret, apply and analyse them.

12

Level of cognitive ability What does it mean? What verbs are useful?

Example outcomes – ‘On successful completion of

this module students will be able to...’

Knowledge What do we expect students to know? What do we expect them to recall and describe?

Arrange; Define; Describe; Identify; Label; List; Memorise; Name; Order; Present; Quote; Recall; Recognise; Relate; Reproduce; Show; State.

… list the operation principles of common digital circuit applications. … identify key features of single-celled organisms. … identify and describe different forms of the sonnet.

Comprehension/ Understanding

What do we expect students to be able to interpret? How do students convey their understanding as well as their recall of a subject?

Clarify; Classify; Conclude; Discuss; Explain; Locate; Indicate; Observe; Recognise; Record; Restate; Review; Select; Summarise; Translate.

… explain how the life cycle of a lytic virus operates. … indicate the key differences between qualitative and quantitative research methods.

Application Can students use a theory or information in different situations? Are students able to articulate the relevance of what they have learned in other circumstances?

Apply; Classify; Demonstrate; Dramatise; Employ; Illustrate; Interpret; Modify; Operate; Practise; Schedule; Sketch; Solve; Use.

… employ P200 and P1000 Gilson Pipettes independently and accurately. … use a Lineweaver-Burke plot to calculate Vmax and Km. … apply appropriate statistical tests to a dataset.

13

Analysis Can students identify and explain relationships between materials? Can they break knowledge down into constituent parts and show how these parts relate to one another?

Analyse; Calculate; Compare; Contrast; Differentiate; Discriminate; Distinguish; Examine; Experiment; Investigate; Plan; Question; Test.

… calculate the number of white blood cells in 1 litre of blood. … compare the replication processes of RNA and DNA viruses. … analyse recent news stories using the IPA’s seven common propaganda devices.

Synthesis Can students take the elements of what they have learned and put them together in a different way? Can they develop a plan or a proposal from a set of knowledge?

Arrange; Assemble; Collate; Compose; Conceptualise; Connect; Construct; Create; Design; Develop; Distil; Elaborate; Formulate; Initiate; Manage; Modify; Organise; Prepare; Propose; Specify; Synthesise.

… construct a dichotomous classification key to identify plant specimens. … design programs using selection statements. … manage the budget for a practical film production project.

Evaluation Can students make judgements about opposing forms of knowledge? Can they construct an evidence-informed argument?

Appraise; Argue; Assess; Choose; Criticise; Debate; Defend; Discriminate; Estimate; Evaluate; Judge; Measure; Rate; Select.

… evaluate the possible approaches to film-editing. … debate the statement “There is a gene for every behaviour”. … assess to what extent educational theory is useful for an understanding of education policy.

Figure 2: Getting the Right Level

14

This said, as a general rule in Bloom’s hierarchy, verbs relating to the ‘lower’ cognitive processes (such as those grouped under ‘knowledge’ and ‘comprehension’) are more likely to be used in outcomes for ‘lower’ levels of study (Levels 4 and 5), while those related to ‘higher’ cognitive processes (such as ‘synthesis’ and ‘evaluation’) are more likely at Levels 6 or 7. This is only more likely, however; it is certainly not always the case! This is explored in greater detail in Figure 2 above.

As stated above, you will want to write fairly broad outcomes for programmes. These should cover a wide range of skills and knowledge and are unlikely to be directly assessed, but will be tested by a range of assessments across the modules contained within those programmes. A variation of this approach is where the programme outcomes are formulated in terms of attributes, or capabilities, which may be generic (for example the University of Hull Graduate Attributes) or subject specific (how you express what is it that a graduate from your discipline can offer to a non-specialist employer). Your subject benchmark statement or Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body (PSRB) requirements may also help with this.

For modules, you will be looking to be more specific in the skills and knowledge you are looking for, and these should be directly linked to assessments carried out during the module.

For individual sessions, the outcomes are likely to be very narrow and specific and you may well not have direct formal assessment, but the students are more likely to be self-assessing their knowledge or skills, or receiving informal feedback on their progress. That is not to say that formal assessment is not appropriate at a session level; you may wish students to complete practical reports, assessed problem sheets or make a presentation – all of which assess skills and knowledge. Whether the activity is formative or summative will in turn impact on whether or not these activities count towards the final module result.

4.4 How many learning outcomes do I need?

The other difference which you may encounter with the different circumstances outlined above is that the number of outcomes may well differ. For instance, there is rarely a need for more than two or three outcomes for an individual session, otherwise they start moving more towards a description of the syllabus than the outcomes you intend students to be able to achieve. In contrast, as a general rule, modules should have around four learning outcomes and programmes around six to eight. Including any more can make it too complicated to understand for students, and you may find yourselves again moving towards a description of the syllabus.

5 Next steps

As a final word, we hope this guide has helped you to see learning outcomes as more than just a tick-box exercise. They are a useful tool and can help everyone who is involved in your curriculum (from colleagues and external examiners to students) to gain an explicit and shared understanding of what its purpose is, and what is expected of them.

We also acknowledge that designing a course is a messy business. It’s one thing to describe in an abstract way what your intended outcomes are. It’s another thing to actually make it happen in practice. Designing a course using learning outcomes is an iterative process and it is likely that learning outcomes will change over time - whether prompted by your reflection on the course, the

15

comments of your external examiner or comments from your students. This is particularly the case when you come to design or replace your assessment. The criteria you use to generate the evidence of learning (your marking criteria) may influence the way you express your learning outcomes.

If you would like any further support in this area then the Academic Practice Advisors in the Learning Enhancement and Academic Practice (LEAP) team are here to help. As well as providing development sessions on writing learning outcomes and developing marking criteria, they will be happy to work with you on a programme and modular basis to support your work in this area.

6 References

Baume, D (2009) Writing and using good learning outcomes. Available online: https://www.leedsbeckett.ac.uk/publications/files/Learning_Outcomes.pdf. Accessed 02.11.15.

Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.

Bloom B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc.

QAA (2009) Academic credit in higher education in England - an introduction. Available online : http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/Credit-Leaflet-Nov-09.pdf. Accessed 02.11.15.

Stefani, L. 2009. ‘Planning teaching and learning: curriculum design and development’. In Fry, H. et al (eds) A handbook for teaching and learning in higher education 3rd ed. London: Routledge.