PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES AND

STUDENT OUTCOMES: SAME BUT DIFFERENT

By Gloria Rogers, Ph.D., ABET Senior Adjunct Director, Professional Offerings

Program educational objectives are the broad statements that describe the career and
professional accomplishments that the program is preparing graduates to achieve. Student
outcomes are statements that describe what students are expected to know or be able to do by
the time they complete an academic program.

Program educational objectives differ from student outcomes in at least four ways: degree of
specificity, role of constituents, purpose of assessment and cycles of data collection.

Degree of specificity: Graduates of the program go into a variety of career/work environments:

graduate school, industry, business, entrepreneurial activities, military, etc. The context within
which graduates will manifest the learning outcomes (what they learned by the time of
graduation) will vary widely. That is, there is no one common environment for graduates of the
program to demonstrate the objectives. As a result, to define the program educational objectives
in narrow ways is counterproductive to the process. Program educational objectives are, by
their nature, broadly stated and should not be narrowly defined. In contrast, student outcomes
are, for the most part, the result of shared experiences of students. Except for a limited number
of elective courses, all students experience the same curriculum. In order to understand whether
these outcomes have been met, it is critical to develop measurable performance indicators
which identify the performance(s) required to meet the outcome. The achievement of the
performance indicators should be confirmable through evidence.

Role of constituents: Program constituents (or “stakeholders”) are those who have a vested
interest in the success of the program. The role of constituents in determining and reviewing
objectives is essential to programs meeting their needs. Although one could argue that students,
parents, community, etc. are program constituents, for the process of establishing the
objectives, the program generally looks to employers, alumni, faculty, and perhaps graduate
schools when determining what graduates of the program will need in order to be successful in
their careers (program educational objectives). For student outcomes, the faculty are the
primary stakeholders to determine the outcomes that will enable students to achieve the
objectives after graduation and how those outcomes will be integrated into the curricular and
co-curricular activities. Although some accrediting agencies might mandate specific outcomes,
programs need to be sure that the outcomes of their program represent the program and
institutional mission as well. The faculty “own” the curriculum. That is not to say that program
advisory boards could not have a meaningful role in the development of curriculum; however,
ultimately it is the faculty responsibility to define the outcomes in ways that are measurable
and to design curriculum to attain the outcomes that finally support achievement of the
objectives.

www.abet.org
Purpose of assessment: Program educational objectives are developed with input from the
program’s constituents. The purpose of involving constituents is to determine if the current
program educational objectives continue to be relevant to the profession and the program. The
assessment of student outcomes at the program level is to determine whether the students are
achieving the outcomes and to identify the strengths and weaknesses in their learning that will
serve as a source of action for program improvement.

Cycles of data collection: Data collection for determining the currency of objectives may take
place less frequently (e.g., only every three years) than outcomes assessment depending on the
cycles that have been developed by the program and the rate at which a discipline is changing.
Student outcomes, however, should be assessed on a more frequent, continuous cycle. That does
NOT mean that data must be collected on every outcome each year. However, it is important
that programs develop a systematic process for data collection that smooths the process out
over time. Focusing on a limited number of outcomes each academic year will enable a program
to have two- or three-cycles of data collection, evaluation and improvements for a six-year
accreditation cycle. This means that data do not need to be collected on every student for every
outcome and that not all faculty need to be involved in the data collection process in any given
year.

Understanding the needs of constituents to promote graduate success (program educational

objectives) and preparing students with the knowledge and skills to meet those needs (student
outcomes) are foundational to the continuous improvement process. Both require assessment
and evaluation in a systematic process. Understanding the differences will help to develop
processes that work best for the program.

www.abet.org