Higher Education Outcomes at the National Level on the Example of the Project “Collegiate Learning Assessment”



We discuss the interpretation of the concept of “learning outcomes”. Theoretical analysis widely represents the interpretations of the learning outcomes of a high school student: academic skills: understanding, application of knowledge to solve problems, synthesis, analysis and evaluation; basic skills and basic knowledge, and skills of a higher order and advanced knowledge; skills of a higher order represented as a system of critical thinking, analytic reasoning, problem solving and written communication; wide abilities interpreted as verbal, quantitative and spatial thinking, understanding, problem solving and decision making. We conclude that each considered approach distinguishes meta-subjective skills, i.e. skills to interact with the quality of information regardless of the context. The ability to measure the meta-skills is discussed on an example of the “Collegiate learning assessment”, realized in the United States.

General Information

Keywords: learning outcomes, higher education, meta-subjective skills, students, testing, measurement, assessment of learning outcomes in higher education, meta-skills, CLA

Journal rubric: Educational Psychology

Article type: scientific article

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17759/pse.2015200202

For citation: Sabelnikova E.V., Khmeleva N.L. Higher Education Outcomes at the National Level on the Example of the Project “Collegiate Learning Assessment” . Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie = Psychological Science and Education, 2015. Vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 16–23. DOI: 10.17759/pse.2015200202. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)


  1. Allan J. Learning outcomes in higher education. Studies in Higher Education. 1996. Vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 93–108.
  2. Bloom B. S. Taxonomy of Educational Objec­tives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. NY: McKay, 1956, pp. 201–207.
  3. CLA+ Overview [Elektronnyi resurs]. Council for Aid to Education. Available at: http://cae.org/ participating-institutions/cla-overview/ (Accessed 24.01.2015).
  4. Cole A. What We Learned about Our Assess­ment Program that has Nothing to do with Student Learning Outcomes. Journal of Political Science Education, 2009, no. 5, pp. 294–314.
  5. Council for Aid to Education [Elektronnyi resurs]. Council for Aid to Education. Available at: http:// www.cae.org/ (Accessed 22.01.2015).
  6. Dewey J. D.,  Montrosse B. E., Schröter D. C., Sullins C. D., Mattox II J. R. Evaluator Competen­cies : What’s Taught Versus What’s Sought. Ameri­can Journal of Evaluation, 2008. Vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 268–287.
  7. Klein S. P., Kuh G. D., Chun M., Hamilton L., Shavelson R. J. An approach to measuring cogni­tive outcomes across higher education institutions. Research in Higher Education, 2005. Vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 251–276.
  8. Kuh G. D. The state of learning outcomes as­sessment in the United States. Higher Education Management and Policy, 2010. Vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 1–20.
  9. McPherson P., Shulenburger D. Improving stu­dent learning in higher education through better ac­countability and assessment: A discussion paper for the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges[Elektronnyi resurs]. National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment. Avail­able at: http://www.voluntarysystem.org/docs/back­ground/DiscussionPaper1_April06.pdf (Accessed 20.01.2015).
  10. Melton R. Learning outcomes for higher educa­tion: Some key issues. British Journal of Educational Studies, 1996. Vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 409–425.
  11. Naughton B. A., Suen  A. Y., Shavelson R. J. Accountability for what? Understanding the learn­ing objectives in state higher education account­ability programs. Chicago: American Educational Research Association, 2003. 238 p.
  12. Nusche D. Assessment of Learning Outcomes in Higher Education: a comparative review of selected practices. OECD Education Working Papers. OECD Publishing, 2008, no. 15. 49 p.
  13. Otter S. Learning Outcomes in Higher Educa­tion. A Development Project Report, Unit for the De­velopment of Adult Continuing Education. London: UDACE, 1992. 54 p.
  14. Shavelson R. J. Responding responsibly to the frenzy to assess learning in higher education. Change, 2003, no. January/February, pp. 10–19.
  15. Spady W. G. Organizing for Results: The Basis of Authentic Restructuring and Reform. Educational Leadership, 1988. Vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 4–8.

Information About the Authors

Elena V. Sabelnikova, Deputy Director of the Information and Coordination Centre for Cooperation with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Institute of Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge, National Research University “Higher School of Economics”, Moscow, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0261-1345, e-mail: Esabelnikova@hse.ru

Natal’ya L. Khmeleva, Senior Lecturer, Institute of Public Administration, Moscow, Russia, e-mail: nlh2009@yandex.ru



Total: 2650
Previous month: 8
Current month: 3


Total: 893
Previous month: 2
Current month: 0