Designing a course is more than selecting content; it’s about clarifying what students will learn, how they will engage with that learning, and how instructors will know whether learning has occurred. At the heart of this process are learning objectives and learning outcomes: distinct but interconnected tools that drive instructional clarity, assessment alignment, and curricular coherence.
Whether you are building a new course from scratch or revising an existing syllabus, understanding how to write measurable objectives and outcomes (and how to align them with course activities and assessments) is essential for transparent, inclusive, and effective teaching.
This resource introduces the core differences between learning objectives and learning outcomes, explores practical strategies for drafting them, highlights taxonomies and tools to support your process, and offers forward-thinking guidance for using AI and digital tools responsibly in your course design.
Learning Outcomes and Learning Objectives Defined
While often used interchangeably, learning outcomes and learning objectives serve distinct purposes in course design.
- Learning objectives describe what instructors intend to cover during a course or learning experience. These are typically short-term, instructor-centered statements tied to instructional planning and content delivery.
- Learning outcomes, by contrast, describe what students will actually achieve and be able to demonstrate by the end of a learning experience. These statements are always student-centered, measurable, and focused on observable behaviors.
Both are useful in course design, but it is the clarity and measurability of learning outcomes that support alignment between your course goals, instructional strategies, and assessments.
Drafting Learning Objectives
When drafting learning objectives, consider the following:
- Describe the instructional goals that guide teaching and content delivery. In other words, how will students engage with the material during this stage of learning?
- Use action verbs that reflect the desired level of student engagement. Refer to Bloom’s Taxonomy to select verbs aligned with the complexity of the content.
- Avoid vague verbs such as introduce, expose, or cover, which describe instructor action but not student interaction. Use verbs like examine, explore, summarize, define, or differentiate.
- Use clear, accessible language. Objectives are instructor-facing but should still be understandable when shared with students.
- Ensure objectives are appropriate in scope for a single lesson, session, or module.
- Connect objectives to outcomes. Objectives serve as scaffolding to support student achievement of broader course outcomes.
- Share objectives in lesson plans, module introductions, or Canvas content pages to orient students to each stage of learning.
Examples of Learning Objectives
Think of each objective as completing the sentence, “During this session/module, students will…”
- Explore foundational concepts in sociological theory.
- Examine primary documents related to New Deal programs.
- Review key scientific studies on anthropogenic climate change.
- Define the basic components of Spanish morphology.
- Identify major themes in Catholic doctrine and practice.
These objectives support transparent scaffolding, ensuring students understand what content or skills are being introduced, practiced, or emphasized in service of longer-term learning outcomes.
Drafting Learning Outcomes
When drafting learning outcomes, consider the following:
- Describe learning that is observable and measurable. What evidence or indicators will show that learning has occurred?
- Use specific action verbs to describe desired cognitive, affective, or psychomotor behaviors. Refer to Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956, revised 2001) and Krathwohl’s Affective Domain to guide verb choice and cognitive complexity.
- Avoid vague terms like understand, know, or be familiar with. Use measurable verbs such as analyze, interpret, construct, critique, or justify.
- Use clear, inclusive language that is jargon-free and accessible to all learners.
- Tailor outcomes to your students’ prior knowledge, identity, and course level (introductory, intermediate, advanced).
- Align outcomes with course activities and assessments. A well-crafted outcome provides the blueprint for what students will do—and how you’ll evaluate success.
- Display outcomes prominently on your syllabus, Canvas course homepage, and assignment descriptions to promote transparency and metacognition.
Examples of Learning Outcomes
Think of each outcome as completing the sentence, “At the end of this learning experience, students will be able to…”
- Apply sociological theories and concepts to the analysis of real-world issues.
- Debate the effectiveness of New Deal programs using evidence from primary sources.
- Critically evaluate the scientific evidence regarding human-caused climate change.
- Identify morphological units of the Spanish language.
- Describe the distinctive character of Catholicism among other religious traditions and its similarities to them.
These outcomes are measurable, observable, and aligned with assessments that may include written analysis, discussion, projects, or presentations.
Mapping Objectives and Outcomes to Coursework
Clear alignment between learning objectives, learning outcomes, instructional activities, and assessments is essential to transparent, equitable, and effective course design. Think of your mapping in four layers:
| Layer | Guiding Question | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Learning Objective | What content or skill will I introduce? | Explore principles of statistical variability |
| Activity | How will students engage with it? | Watch a demonstration, then analyze a dataset in groups |
| Learning Outcome | What should students be able to demonstrate after learning? | Calculate and interpret standard deviation in real-world scenarios |
| Assessment | How will I know they achieved the outcome? | Submit a lab report with written justification of results |
Mapping these elements intentionally allows you to:
- Clarify expectations for diverse learners
- Create cohesive learning sequences
- Ensure fair grading by tying assessments directly to outcomes
- Support program review and accreditation through transparent documentation of learning
Sample Course Map Grid
Consider creating a simple mapping grid for your specific course and discipline. This approach supports a backward design model: Start with outcomes → map aligned activities and assessments → clarify objectives to scaffold the journey. For example:
| Discipline | Learning Objective | Learning Outcome | Suggested Activity | Assessment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| STEM | Present the concept of Ohm’s Law | Apply Ohm’s Law to solve multi-variable circuit problems | Guided worksheet and interactive circuit simulator | Problem set with explanation |
| Humanities | Introduce post-colonial literary frameworks | Analyze the role of identity in Things Fall Apart | Thematic close reading discussion | Short analytical essay |
| Fine Arts | Demonstrate complementary color use | Create a piece applying complementary schemes with intent | Painting/drawing studio workshop | Portfolio submission with artist’s statement |
| Business | Explain financial ratios | Interpret liquidity ratios to assess company health | Spreadsheet modeling and case study | Executive summary based on fictional scenario |
Tools and Frameworks
- ABCD Model: A simple, memorable structure for writing objectives that are specific and measurable (Audience/Actor, Behavior, Condition, Degree).
- Bloom’s Taxonomy (Revised): A hierarchy of cognitive learning domains, from lower-order thinking (remember, understand) to higher-order (evaluate, create).
- Fink’s Taxonomy: Expands learning beyond cognition into integration, application, caring, learning how to learn, and the human dimension. Useful for holistic course and program design.
- Krathwohl’s affective taxonomy: Focuses on emotional, value-based learning outcomes (e.g., receiving, responding, valuing, organizing, characterizing). Useful for ethics, civic learning, and social-emotional competencies.
Using AI and Other Tools to Draft Objectives and Outcomes
As instructional technology advances, educators have access to an expanding set of tools to support course design. In particular, AI writing assistants, taxonomy-aligned outcome generators, and curriculum mapping platforms can help instructors draft, refine, and align learning objectives and outcomes with greater ease and precision. These tools include:
- AI-based text generators (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude)
- Taxonomy-aligned builders (e.g., Arizona State’s Outcome Generator, Bloom’s Verb Tools)
- Curriculum mapping platforms (e.g., Coursetune, Watermark, or LMS-integrated outcome tools)
Used thoughtfully, these tools can support efficient drafting and greater alignment, but they are not without limitations.
| Benefits | Drawbacks |
|---|---|
| Can accelerate the writing process when time or inspiration is limited | May produce vague or imprecise outcomes that lack relevance to your course or discipline |
| Offers suggested verbs aligned with Bloom’s or Krathwohl’s taxonomies | May suggest verbs that misalign with the intended cognitive level or assessment method |
| Generates multiple phrasing options for varying levels of complexity | Often produces generic statements that require significant refinement |
| Helps rephrase outcomes in more student-centered or accessible language | May reflect unintentional bias or omit inclusive language if not carefully reviewed |
| Supports brainstorming for interdisciplinary or unfamiliar course design | External tools may introduce privacy concerns if institutional or unpublished materials are shared |
AI and other tools can be useful assistants in the course design process, but they should never replace your professional judgment, disciplinary expertise, or alignment with institutional standards. Before integrating these tools into your course design process, consider the following:
- Departmental and program standards: Are there required frameworks, templates, or vocabulary for outcomes in your department, school, or accreditation body (e.g., ABET, AACSB, WASC)?
- Curriculum committee or course approval policies: Will your outcomes meet the language and structure expected in catalog submissions or syllabi reviews?
- Accessibility and DEI principles: Does the language reflect inclusive, anti-racist, or culturally responsive pedagogy as defined by your unit or campus guidelines?
- Transparency and accountability: If you use AI-generated drafts, you are still responsible for ensuring their alignment, accuracy, and pedagogical integrity.
You might consider a personal checklist like:
- Are these outcomes measurable and aligned with assessments?
- Do they meet departmental and accreditation requirements?
- Is the language inclusive and appropriate to my learner’s level?
- If AI was used, did I review and revise the output for relevance?
Conclusion
Clear learning objectives and outcomes are more than administrative checkboxes; they are the foundation for intentional, student-centered teaching. When thoughtfully constructed and mapped to course activities and assessments, they:
- Create a shared roadmap for learners and instructors
- Support equity by making expectations explicit
- Enhance assessment fairness and curricular alignment
- Provide essential scaffolding for reflection, feedback, and improvement
As you continue designing or refining your course, consider how you can make your objectives more transparent, your outcomes more measurable, and your assessments more aligned. Use the tools and frameworks shared here as starting points, but let your disciplinary expertise, institutional values, and pedagogical commitments guide the final design.
References
Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Co.
Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook II: Affective domain. New York: David McKay Co.
Mager, R. F. (1997). Preparing instructional objectives: A critical tool in the development of effective instruction (3rd ed.). Atlanta, GA: The Center for Effective Performance.Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (Expanded 2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.