In the process of trying to define the content of course, the box on the form marked learning outcomes, is perhaps the one that causes the most frustration and confusion amongst academics. However, if done well they are be a powerful tool that can be used to help students understand what they need to learn within the course and help staff to create assessment that really aligns with what we’d like students to be able to do.

Here I’ve tried to boil down to a few very basic pointers on what is useful to think about when defining learning outcomes in Engineering. There is a very good guide and rational for their use on the Higher Education Academy website called – Using Learning Outcomes to Design a Course and Assess Learning Outcomes.

• Learning outcomes are what the student should be able to do as a result of taking the course, ideally something that is measurable. So typically an action rather than a concept.
• Although understand is the first term that comes to mind this is often too broad a term covering a range of different levels. If a student has the understanding you are looking for what would they be able to do? If it is about knowledge they might be able to describe, define, list, recognise, explain, select, identify or sketch. For application they might choose, apply, determine, solve, use, perform, recognise . Analysis might require student to be able to calculate, measure, criticise, differentiate, evaluate, compute, analyse, conduct and experience to, contract, test or appraise. High level activities would require students to formulate, create, propose, develop construct, assemble and design. There is a much better list in the link above, but hopefully this gives some ideas.
• Where possible be specific (within reason). If you would only expect the student to be able to solve the problem in 1 dimension or for 1st order problems, say so.

Even the process of thinking these terms through can be useful, perhaps giving inspiration to set a different sought of coursework, to teach the topic in a different way or to attach a more interesting or engaging sort of lab to the course that really challenges to the student to put into practice the concepts that have been taught.

Engineers have always driven change and will continue to do so, making life better by advancing transport, healthcare, communications, impacting on all spheres of life. But what tools and skills will current Engineer students need so that they will be changing the world in 20 or 50 years time? Are our current programmes providing the best possible education to enable these world changers? These are big questions which are not easy to answer.

We know that the world’s big problems don’t respect disciplinary boundaries, we’ve been saying it for a long time. We talk about cross-disciplinary this, interdisciplinary that and trans-disciplinary the other, but how should we equip our graduates to operate in this multi-disciplinary world?

Although we offer highly regarded, rigorous programmes that are performing well against all the usual metrics, make more connections at a faculty level in the provision of teaching and learning could enhance the student experience and better equip our graduates for their broad range of future roles. Currently, we are reviewing how this can best be achieved. We have a foundation of excellent teaching but from this we want to develop a framework where common elements, discipline mobility and interdisciplinary working are part of the experience.

It’s clear that any changes must:

• Provide added value to the graduates produced by the faculty
• Result in no loss of rigour in the Engineering Science of the degrees offered
• Improve the student experience
• Produce a distinctive, UCL educational package
• Produce graduate Engineering leaders capable of looking at complex engineering problems across multiple disciplines but with a deep rooted understanding of a specialist discipline
• Be clearly aligned with the areas of research excellence of UCL Engineering
• Meet the requirements of all appropriate accrediting bodies

Not much to ask then. But then if it was easy, everyone would be doing it.