Drs. Lisa Kidder and Sacha Johnson from Idaho State University presented at the Quality in Action April 2022 QM conference on “Fake SLOs and Upside Down Alignment.” Their presentation had the learning objectives of recognize fake learning outcomes, identify strategies for revising fake learning outcomes, and apply Bloom’s Taxonomy to locate upside down alignment. Johnson presented at another session earlier in this conference and again used a “What is your role?” slide with four options and asked that the audience annotate the slide or write in a response. I like that approach! They then reviewed learning outcomes that are “fake” such as “submit a lesson plan based on your investigation of a treatment approach using resources” or “turn in a boundary survey map for a given topographic map.” These are activities or assignments! Next, they reviewed “develop an understanding of the historical roots/significance of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) including knowledge of evolving theories and trends and their ramifications” and “develop your understanding of the ethical and legal considerations in professional and technical writing.” But… what do we want the students to learn? They then did a series of challenging “fake” learning objectives for the audience to decide whether they were topics, resources, activities, or assessments. Kidder spoke about upside down alignment and described the course-level and module-level outcomes (SRS 2.1 and 2.2). Kidder prompted the audience to break down content into course outcomes and module outcomes based on the tasks. The “level” of the verb is important to keep track of and how “precise” the outcomes are. Johnson also emphasized the importance of faculty understanding the process, checking alignment, and asking questions. This session had thought-provoking examples of “fake” learning objectives I had not considered. Now I can identify a couple of those in the courses I teach!
