h1

A&P rant, part 3: are these Learning Outcomes prescriptive?

November 26, 2019

The Human Anatomy & Physiology Society (HAPS), the subject of my previous two posts, has an email listserv to which I posted links to those first two posts. There have been a few responses so far — all informative and civil, and some arguing that (A) some (many?) HAPS members already believe in and have implemented the various things I’m recommending, and/or that (B) the HAPS Learning Outcomes are not necessarily intended to be prescriptive, i.e., they aren’t telling people how to teach. In that context, I posted the following follow-up message to the listserv this evening….

* * * * * *

Thanks, everybody, for the additional comments! I’m delighted that my blowhardiness has not stopped people from gently providing me/us with additional context.

One clarification I want to make is that I do understand that lots of you, as individuals and/or as departments, have, like Meg, taken it upon yourselves to do the integration, skill-building, etc. that I am advocating. You don’t need me to lecture you about this stuff, do you? Still, I am very concerned about the implicit messages that are conveyed by the combination of the LOs and the HAPS exam.

Ric gave us some valuable history about how and why the LOs came to be. He says that as far as he knows, they were not intended to be prescriptive, and I have no reason to doubt him! BUT… If HAPS offers a single type of A&P exam, and charges money to use it, and does not allow instructors to cannibalize its parts or otherwise alter it, and commissions independent analysts to write white papers on the validity of said exam, and touts the various metrics indicating that the exam has a high level of validity… In short, when HAPS puts a lot of resources into one particular assessment, and encourages people to use that assessment, and when that assessment is based directly on a specific set of LOs…. Well, that IS a sort of prescription, whether people can admit it or not. And, as my blog posts explain, I don’t love the prescription that is implied.

To be clear, no HAPS member has ever directly told me “you’re doing it wrong!” or otherwise indicated that there is only one right way of doing things. You all are too smart, too sophisticated, too nice to make that blunder. But the way that the LOs are linked to the highly touted HAPS exam is a clear (if implicit) endorsement of approaches that will lead to success on that exam. And, by extension, arguably an indication of less interest in the types of learning that cannot be measured by that exam.

–Greg

* * * * * *

[Update, Nov. 28: this series continues (and concludes?) with Part 4.]

2 comments

  1. […] of life's curves and straightaways. « My shadow A&P exam A&P rant, part 3: are these Learning Outcomes prescriptive? […]


  2. […] Explorations of life's curves and straightaways. « A&P rant, part 3: are these Learning Outcomes prescriptive? […]



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: