top of page

Unidad 3: Cognitivismo

Learning Outcomes vs. Learning Objectives

Nested within the Program Outcomes are the Course Learning Outcomes and subordinate Learning Objectives, whether they be module or weekly outcomes (The American Women's College, n.d.). The Course Learning Outcome defines the overarching, likely complex goal, while the subordinate Learning Objectives are the broken-down, manageable blocks that lead to the Course Learning Outcome. 

​

This is a similar approach to what the Marine Corps uses. Terminal Learning Objectives are the overarching knowledge, skills, and attitudes that a learner must demonstrate upon completing a module or course (Department of the Navy, 2016).  Enabling learning objectives are the smaller, specific milestones or manageable steps to achieving the terminal objective.  Additional milestones include specific tasks and assessments (Parker, 2021). 

​

Examples: 

  • Learning Outcome: Upon completion of this mini-course, learners will be able to differentiate among the ten supporting and operational Divisions within Marine Corps Community Services (MCCS), Marine Corps Installations (MCI) – West, based on their primary functions and responsibilities

    • Learning Objective: By the end of this module, learners will recall the names of the ten Divisions within MCCS, MC-West. ​

    • Learning Objective: Given a list responsibilities, learners will match the Division with the respective resource(s) it provides.

  • Learning Outcome: By the end of this mini-course, learners will be able to explain how a selected MCCS program or facility supports the Marine Corps Total Fitness (MCTF) concept​.

    • Learning Objective: ​Presented with a list of resources, the learner will communicate which MCTF pillar the resources best support and why. 

    • Learning Objective: Given a scenario involving a Marine in need of assistance, the learner will connect the Marine's needs with the applicable MCCS resource. 

​

Bloom's Taxonomy is "a structural classification system for defining and distinguishing different levels of human cognition" (Learning Everest, 2024). This system consists of six levels: 

  • Remember: the learner simply retrieves the information from memory. The learner doesn't necessarily need to understand or do anything with the information; they simply need to be able to recall it. In my mini-course, a learner only needs to recite the ten Divisions within the organization. 

  • Understand: the learner takes the recallable information and is able to explain the information, even in generalized terms, and give it meaning. The learner can go beyond simply reciting information and summarize, explain, and/or describe it. In my mini-course, learners would be able to describe each Division in their own words.

  • Apply: the learner takes the existing knowledge and is able to use it for new situations, new environments, and/or new contexts. In my mini-course, learners will be able to address customer needs by connecting them with the appropriate Division and its respective resources. 

  • Analyze: the learner utilizes critical thinking to identify patterns and relationships. At this level, learners can question and experiment with their knowledge.  They can break down knowledge into smaller parts. When looking at the Marine Corps Total Fitness (MCTF) concept, learners can deconstruct each Division's resources and connect multiple Division resources to each respective MCTF pillar.

  • Evaluate: the learner operates at a level where they are able to critique and assess the value of information, rather than just consuming it. At this level, learners can hypothesize and make conclusions. In my mini-course, learners can test resources for effectiveness and judge the level of necessity for each Division's resources. 

  • Create: the learner is able to generate, design, and construct new knowledge. Where previous levels allowed for breaking down knowledge, this level allows the learner to build new schemas. In my mini-course, this level of knowledge leads to process improvement and learners being able to design new resources. 

​

Artificial Intelligence Disclosure
I used Grammarly as a thought partner to assist with organization, spellchecking, and editing for clarity. All final ideas, content, and analysis are my own.  I used Gemini to generate graphics throughout my website. 

 Haga clic aquí para obtener referencias y recursos adicionales que contribuyeron a este contenido.

Department of the Navy (2016, September 15). Marine Corps instructional systems design/systems approach to training and education handbook. (NAVMC 1553.aA). 

​​​

Learning Everest. (2024, March 1). Benjamin Bloom’s taxonomy in workplace training: Taking learning to a higher level. https://www.learningeverest.com/benjamin-blooms-taxonomy-in-workplace-training-taking-learning-to-a-higher-level/#:~:text=Bloom

​​

Parker, T. (2021, May 12). Terminal Objective, Enabling Objectives, Tasks & Assessments. Medium. https://triciaparkerdesigns.medium.com/terminal-objective-enabling-objectives-tasks-assessments-76461288095a

‌

The American Women's College. (n.d.). Learning outcomes and objectives. Course development handbook. Bay Path University. https://open.baypath.edu/coursedevelopment/chapter/program-level-objectives/

​

University of Maryland Global Campus. (2024). Course learning outcomes (terminal) vs. learning objectives (enabling). Brightspace. https://leocontent.umgc.edu/content/umuc/tgs/ldtc/ldtc605/2262/unit-7/course-learning-outcomes--terminal--vs--learning-objectives--ena.html?ou=1378426​​​

Volver arriba

bottom of page