Abstract
Constructive alignment is an outcomes-based approach to teaching that we describe here, illustrating with examples from the teaching of anatomy. Constructive alignment is based on two principles: constructivist psychology, which posits that students construct their knowledge through appropriate learning activities; and curriculum theory, which posits that optimal learning is achieved when teaching and assessment methods are aligned to the learning outcomes that it is intended students are to achieve. Students are thus encouraged to engage in learning activities that are relevant in achieving that outcome. Teaching here is not topic-based, as is traditional teaching, but focuses on what students are intended to do after they have learned the curriculum topics. The outcome statements contain a verb or verbs that specify these intended outcome activities, and these verbs are specifically addressed both in teaching and in assessment.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Miller MA, Ewell P. Measuring up on college-level learning. San Jose, CA: The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education; 2005.
Shuell TJ. Cognitive conceptions of learning. Rev Educ Res. 1986;56:411–36.
Biggs JB. Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. High Educ. 1996;32:1–18.
Biggs J, Tang C. Teaching for quality learning at university. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill and Open University Press; 2011.
Colvin J, Phelan A. Evaluating student opinion of constructivist learning activities on computing undergraduate degrees. In: 1st annual workshop on constructive alignment, February 2006, Nottingham Trent University.
Boyle A. Using alignment and reflection to improve student learning. Elements. 2007;3(2):113–7.
Lebrun M. Quality towards an expected harmony: Pedagogy and technology speaking together about innovation. Assoc Adv Comput Educ J. 2007;15(2):115–30.
Nightingale S, Carew A, Fung J. Application of constructive alignment principles to engineering education: Have we really changed? In: Proceedings of the 2007 Australasian association for engineering education conference, Melbourne; 2007.
Raeburn P, Muldoon N, Bookallil C. Blended spaces, work-based learning and constructive alignment: Impacts on student engagement. In: Same places, different spaces. 2009. pp. 820–31. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/auckland09/procs/
Hoddinott J. Biggs’ constructive alignment: Evaluation of a pedagogical model applied to a web course. In: Bourdeau J, Heller R, editors. In: Proceedings of world conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia and telecommunications, Chesapeake, VA; 2000. pp. 1666–7.
Ladyshewsky R. Aligning assessment, rewards, behaviours and outcomes in group learning tasks. In: Evaluation and assessment conference: enhancing student learning. Bentley, WA: Curtin University; 2006.
Moulding NT. Intelligent design: student perceptions of teaching and learning in large social work classes. High Educ Res Dev. 2010;29(2):151–65.
Morris MM. Evaluating university teaching and learning in an outcome-based model: replanting Bloom. PhD Thesis. Wollongong: University of Wollongong; 2008.
Brook V. Learning-focused curriculum development: the redesign of elements of a PGCE Science (Subject Year) Programme. Investig Univ Teach Learn. 2006;3(2):27–35.
Taylor R, Canfield P. Learning to be a scholarly teaching faculty: cultural change through shared leadership. In: Brew A, Sachs J, editors. The transformed university: scholarship of teaching and learning in action. Sydney: Sydney University Press; 2007.
Rust C. The impact of assessment on student learning: how can the research literature practically help to inform the development of departmental assessment strategies and learner-centred assessment practices? Act Learn High Educ. 2002;3:145–58.
Edström K. Doing course evaluation as if learning matters most. High Educ Res Dev. 2008;27(2):95–106.
Kandlbinder P, Peseta T. Key concepts in postgraduate certificates in higher education teaching and learning in Australasia and the United Kingdom. Int J Acad Dev. 2009;14(1):19–31.
Harris D, Bell C. Evaluating and assessing for learning. London: Kogan Page; 1986.
Boud D. Enhancing learning through self-assessment. London: Kogan Page; 1995.
Boud D. Implementing student self-assessment. Green Guide No. 5. Sydney: Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia; 1986.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Biggs, J., Tang, C. (2015). Constructive Alignment: An Outcomes-Based Approach to Teaching Anatomy. In: Chan, L., Pawlina, W. (eds) Teaching Anatomy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08930-0_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08930-0_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-08929-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-08930-0
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)