International Education Studies November, 2008

Implementation of Outcome-Based Education in Universiti Putra Malaysia:

A Focus on Students’ Learning Outcomes
Mohd Ghazali Mohayidin
Faculty of Agriculture, Universiti Putra Malaysia
43300, UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
Tel: 60-3-8946-4120 E-mail: mghazalee@putra.upm.edu.my

Turiman Suandi, Ghazali Mustapha & Mohd. Majid Konting

Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia
43300, UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
Tel: 603-8946-8247, 603-8946-8180, 603-8946-6136
E-mail: tj@putra.upm.edu.my, gm@educ.upm.edu.my, majid@educ.upm.edu.my

Norfaryanti Kamaruddin, Nor Azirawani Man, Azura Adam & Siti Norziah Abdullah
Centre for Academic Development, Universiti Putra Malaysia
43300, UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
Tel: 60-3-8946-6175
E-mail: norfaryanti@putra.upm.edu.my, norazirawani@putra.upm.edu.my

Abstract
The move towards applying outcome-based education in teaching and learning at tertiary education level has become an
important topic in Malaysia. Apart from the three learning domains; namely, cognitive, psychomotor and affective, the
Ministry of Higher Education has determined eight learning outcomes which are important in providing wholesome
quality education to students. Universiti Putra Malaysia has conducted a study to determine the extent to which these
learning outcomes have been achieved. The result shows the overall perceived achievements were as follows: cognitive
domain was at level four, psychomotor domain at level four and affective domain at level three. The Ministry’s set of
learning outcomes revealed the following results: The highest score went to providing KNOWLEDGE to students,
while the least achievable learning outcome was MANAGERIAL AND ENTREPRENEURIAL SKILLS. The results
infer that soft-skills among students were lacking and this problem needs to be addressed quickly and effectively.
Keywords: Outcome-based education, Learning domains, Learning outcomes, Cognitive, Psychomotor, Affective
1. Introduction
The move towards applying outcome-based education (OBE) in handling teaching and learning instructions at tertiary
education has been one of the most widely considered topics in educational sector in recent years. Concerns on the fact
that the education system widely practiced ill-adequately prepares graduates to face challenges in life and at work
places in the 21st Century have prompted people across the world to explore new ways of designing and re-branding
academic and educational curriculum.
OBE was developed and has been in practiced since 1950s in Malaysia. It is now being implemented at all levels of
education especially at higher institutions of learning. OBE is an education philosophy organized according to several
basic beliefs and principles for the learners to practice in order to become successful in life when they finish their
studies. It starts with the belief that students can benefit from any educational program only when the instructional
outcomes can be measured as a result of any instructions. Higher educational institutions should be able to monitor the
levels of outcomes expected from any academic courses through the propagation of quality teaching by qualified
lecturers. These will in-turn result in meaningful learning experiences for the students. Instructions should be
strategized in accordance with the desired exit outcomes. This would be largely dependent on relevant instructional

147
Vol. 1, No. 4 International Education Studies

strategies utilized by the lecturers in order to achieve relevant skills with high standards of achievement in line with
high expectations of all students.
Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) has implemented OBE in its teaching and learning strategy. Apart from the three
learning domains; namely, cognitive, psychomotor and affective, UPM has also emphasized that students achieve eight
learning outcomes as determined by the Ministry of Higher Education (MoHE) which are important in providing
wholesome quality education to students. The learning outcomes are Life Long Learning and Information Management,
Communication Skills, Managerial and Entrepreneurial Skills, Psychomotor / Practical / Technical Skills, Knowledge,
Social skills and Responsibility and Professionalism, Values, Attitudes and Ethics. This study was conducted to
determine the extent to which the learning outcomes have been achieved.
2. Outcome-based Education at Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM)
At its most basic level, OBE is where the school and community first determine what skills and knowledge students
should possess upon graduation, then work backwards from there to develop curriculum, strategies and materials to help
students achieve those goals, or “exit outcomes”. Generally, in OBE learning, all educational programs and instructional
efforts are designed to have produced specific, lasting results in students by the time they leave school (Blust 1995).
Schools that have successfully implemented OBE programs which ascribed auspicious results such as Alhambra High
School in Phoenix, Arizona, reported significant improvements in attitude and performance by both students and
teachers within the first year (Briggs 1988). And, after four years of OBE, the Sparta School District in Illinois achieved
radical gains in grades and test scores in spite of its previous financial and labour problems (Brown 1988).
In Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), the teaching and learning instructions are conducted using the semester system
where one academic year is divided into two semesters. During the course of each semester students will be given
instructions according to the aims and objectives of each subject/course offered by the university. Evaluations on
students’ academic performance are conducted in the forms of quizzes, assignments, examinations and other forms of
assessment such as practical works and field practices.
There are 64 academic programs offered by 16 academic faculties in UPM. Each program needs to fulfil a total number
of credit hours for a student to undertake before he or she is considered qualified for a degree in that program. Some of
the programs prescribed major and minor courses in related fields as a requisite to qualify for a degree. The academic
courses offered by each faculty can be divided into three different categories; the university courses, core courses and
elective courses. The core courses are compulsory for all students to take, lest, their study will be considered incomplete.
While the university and elective courses are courses offered for the purpose of enriching students’ general knowledge
in fields related to their programs. Students have the freedom to choose from the list of courses provided by the
university.
UPM has a vision to become an internationally renowned university. Though the University has achieved much and
made great strides in recent years, particularly in the areas of research and innovation, there is still much to be desired
and done before UPM can attain the status of a first-class, world-renowned institution of higher learning. If UPM is to
achieve its goal of becoming an overall excellent institution, it must address the claims made by some quarters that the
University is not actually producing world-class, 'top quality' graduates that are highly sought after by prospective
employers. For example, there are anecdotal evidences that come from government officials, the media as well as
industry representatives in Malaysia which indicate that many UPM graduates are found to be having difficulty and
weak in the skills of communication and creative self-expression to such an extent that they even have difficulty in
getting through their job interviews. Once hired, many are said to be lacking in higher-order and lateral thinking skills,
creativity, analytical skills and other skills required to make them efficient and proficient problem solvers and decision
makers.
In order to produce quality graduates at UPM, teaching and learning instruction, assessment procedures and techniques
should be highly tailored for the desired exit outcomes (Universiti Putra Malaysia 2004). UPM’s goal of producing
first-class graduates should be reflective in the teaching and learning objectives which are observable and achievable
via the adequate and appropriate teaching and learning approaches and strategies. Assessment should possess high
degree of discriminating effect that classifies student according to their actual skills and abilities. There is a wealth of
assessment methods used in higher education to assess students’ achievements. The choice of assessment procedure
should be tailored to meet the learning needs of students.
The intended goal also implies that UPM lecturers should be equipped with first-class quality of teaching instruction
and are capable of delivering the finest education to their students. Lackadaisical instructional strategies with lacklustre
attitude would not be at all warranted. There is a need to be flexible in approaching and creative in strategising while
meeting the needs of both students and lecturers in the process of achieving the course learning objectives. Lecturers
can choose suitable learning methods such as Problem-Based Learning (PBL), Student-Centred Learning (SCL) and
other relevant approaches. There is also a need for lecturers to undergo courses in aptitude assessment to determine their

148
International Education Studies November, 2008

teaching styles and preferences, including obtaining personality and socio-historical profiles that underlie their
educational beliefs and practices. This type of assessment can provide much toward determining the training needs of
lecturers that will ensure the right ingredients that are necessary to make the needs of students.
The purpose of OBE is to equip all students with the knowledge and competencies needed for their future success.
Thereby, it is necessary to implement programs and conditions that maximize learning experiences. The objective of the
study is to assess lecturer’s perception on how far the students have achieved the stated learning domains and learning
outcomes.
3. Literature Review
Learning outcomes can serve as a benchmark to measure a success of a university. Learning outcomes as ‘being
something that student can do now that they could not do previously’ are changes in people as a result of a learning
experience (Watson 2002). Learning outcomes can be used in a way that meets the needs of all stakeholders in
university (i.e. the student, the lecturer and external parties). It has been theorized that learning outcomes consists of
three broad categories or domains of learning as shown in Table 1.
"Student learning outcomes," on the other hand, encompass a wide range of student attributes and abilities, both
cognitive and affective, which are a measure of how their college experiences have supported their development as
individuals (Bloom 1977). Cognitive outcomes include demonstrable acquisition of specific knowledge and skills.
Affective outcomes are also of considerable interest; how has their college experience impacted students' values, goals,
attitudes, self-concepts, worldviews, and behaviours? Psychomotor domains involve physical movement, coordination,
and use of the motor-skills areas. Development of these skills requires practice and is measured in terms of speed,
precision, distance, procedures or techniques.
The outcomes also serve the following purposes:
x The specific outcomes of the learning areas are organized so that UPM can prepare learning programmes
appropriate for each phase of education.
x Lecturers will prepare lessons and activities to assist student in meeting the required outcomes.
x The student will be assessed to see if he or she can demonstrate the outcomes. The results of the assessment show
whether the student is competent or still needs assistance in order to achieve a particular outcome.
x If a student still needs assistance, more activities are designed around the same outcomes in the learning
programme. These activities address the learner’s weaknesses.
x If the student is competent, he or she can start working on more complex outcomes
The purpose of student learning outcomes is to ensure that the graduates acquire the essential core of a
university-educated person in keeping with the university’s mission and its strategic plan. In addition, the learning
outcomes provide an opportunity for graduates to acquire the knowledge and skills. The MoHE has determined and
categorized the learning outcomes for the local institutions of higher learning as shown in Figure 1.
Teaching approach can be defined as the behaviours or actions that lecturers and learners exhibit in the learning
exchange (Heimlich and Norland 2002). Teaching behaviours reflect the teachers’ beliefs and value about the learner’s
role in the exchange. Learners’ behaviours provide insight into the ways learners perceive, interact with, and respond to
the environment in which learning occurs.
Each teacher is unique and can use his or her style to be as effective an educator as possible. In the teaching and
learning contexts, teaching effectively is a learned skill requiring knowledge of educational process, mastery of the
instructional methods, and an ability to use with a variety of learners and setting (Ladd and Ruby 1999).
4. Methodology
This study involves lecturers teaching diploma and degree programs in UPM. The instrument was developed by a
research team. The instrument has been developed by focusing on two (2) major domains, they are; teaching and
learning taxonomy (cognitive, psychomotor, and affective) and MoHE learning outcomes. Levels and explanation for
each domain are referred from Bloom’s Taxonomy.
The instrument also measures the perceived attainment level of learning outcomes that have been developed by MoHE
for courses that have been taught in the semester. The scale is from 1 to 10 where 1 indicates the lowest perceived
attainment level of learning outcomes and 10 indicates the highest perceived attainment level.
By the same token, the instrument covers respondents’ profile and the background for courses taught. The respondents
are UPM lecturers from all faculties. The instrument was distributed to the departments in faculties according to the
number of degree courses taught at week 10th. The instrument was distributed to all lecturers from each faculty via the
Head of Department who will in-turn sent the completed ones back to CADe.

149
Vol. 1, No. 4 International Education Studies

The entire courses offered from 16 faculties are categorized into three clusters which are Social Sciences, Biosciences &
Medical and Physical Sciences & Engineering. Courses offered by Faculty of Educational Studies, Faculty of Human
Ecology, Faculty of Economics and Management and Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication are
categorized under Social Sciences cluster while Faculty of Agriculture, Faculty of Forestry, Faculty of Veterinary
Medicine, Faculty of Food Science and Technology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences are categorized under the
cluster of Biosciences and Medical. Faculty of Engineering, Faculty of Science, Faculty of Design and Architecture,
Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology and Faculty of Environmental Studies are chosen to represent
the cluster of Physical Sciences and Engineering. Table 2 shows the responses from each cluster.
The data was analyzed using descriptive analysis to determine the frequency, mean and standard deviation. Analysis of
variance, using ANOVA, was to see whether there are significance differences between teaching and learning domains
and learning outcomes among clusters of Social Sciences, Biosciences & Medical and Physical Sciences &
Engineering.
5. Results and Discussion
5.1 Students’ Attainment based on Learning Domains
5.1.1 Cognitive
The cognitive domains involve knowledge and the development of intellectual skills. These domains consist of six
major categories starting from the simplest behaviour to the most complex. The categories can be thought of as degrees
of difficulties. Table 3 shows the distributions of response.
5.1.2 Psychomotor
The psychomotor domain consists of physical movement, coordination, and use of the motor-skill areas. Development
of these skills requires practice and is measured in terms of speed, precision, distance, procedures, or techniques. Table
4 demonstrates the distributions of response.
5.1.3 Affective
This domain includes the manner in which the study deals with things emotionally, such as feelings, values,
appreciation, enthusiasms, motivations, and attitudes. The other skills in the affective domains were fairly utilized by
the lecturers as illustrated in Table 5.
The result shows that from general perspective, the level of perception perceived by all lecturers in the domains used in
their teaching instruction in Semester I 2006/2007 and Semester II 2006/2007 were consistent as shown in Table 6.
5.1.4 Analysis of Variance for Teaching and Learning Domains
Table 7 shows the relationship between level of perception of utilization of teaching and learning domains by lecturers
from different clusters.
5.2 Learning Outcomes
Table 8 presents the distributions of response by the perceived attainment level of learning outcomes. The details of the
percentage levels of attainment of learning outcomes for all courses using eight elements of learning outcomes by
clusters are shown in Appendix 2.
Using the Likert scale ranging from 1 to 10, where 1-3 indicates ‘Low’, 4-6 indicates ‘Moderate’ and 7-10 indicates
‘High’, it is noticed that the overall perception ranged from low to high, the MANAGERIAL AND
ENTREPRENEURIAL SKILL were regarded as ‘Low’ in terms of attainment, while the rest lies in the region from
‘Moderate’ to ‘High’. The results were illustrated in Table 9. The details of the means levels of attainment of learning
outcomes for all courses using eight elements of learning outcomes by clusters are shown in Appendix 3.
5.2.1 Analysis of Variance for Learning Outcomes
Illustrated in Table 10 were the results for relationships of the attainment of learning outcomes by lecturers from
different clusters
6. Summary and Conclusion
This paper has indicated that majority of the lecturers of UPM were able to infuse the required levels of cognitive,
affective and psychomotor domains in their instructions in line with the effort of producing students with wholesome
and global qualities. The utilization of all levels of domains from the three major constructs was prevalent. As indicated
by the instructions conducted in both semesters 1 and 2, all domains of cognitive, psychomotor and affective were
evenly utilised across the board.
The infusion of low order cognitive domains in an instruction, which concentrates on providing students with basic
understanding of facts is equally as important as providing them with the higher order categories that call for the

150
International Education Studies November, 2008

employment of critical and creative thinking skills. Students need to understand the facts of the matter before engaging
in employing those facts for higher order thinking, such as to analyse, synthesise, evaluate, or even spiritualize. There is
a need to highlight that each instruction must ensure that higher order thinking skills must be made the ultimate aim.
Some lecturers were engaging on the low-order cognitive domains in their instructions could be due to the fact that
students were newly recruited and there is a need for them to understand the basics of instruction or it could also be due
to the objective nature of certain subjects which require employment of literal instruction. This needs to be ascertained.
The utilisation of psychomotor domains was well spread out in the instructions. As indicated by table 4, students were
able to utilise levels 3 and 4, i.e. ‘guided response’ and ‘mechanism’. This shows that some students still require
instructors’ guidance in their psychomotor activities. Nevertheless, it is acknowledge that the other half of the majority
is already gaining confidence in doing things on their own. Overall, about 26% of them can be considered substantial in
attaining the ability to engage the higher order categories of the psychomotor domains i.e. ‘complex overt response’,
‘adaptation’, and ‘origination’. It is acknowledged that a sizeable percentage of the students were already attaining the
higher order psychomotor skills.
The affective domains were well infused in the instructions. Students were seen to be well equipped with all the
domains that are important to their development of moral, attitudes, and feelings. This aspect of development is of
utmost important to ensure that intellectual development as prescribed by the cognitive domains is fairly substantiated
by the moral aspects of character development. This is in line with the intention of producing students who are not only
cognitively smart but also morally upright and upstanding.
In the effort of producing first class graduates with wholesome quality, characteristics and aptitudes in UPM, we need to
also consider assessment procedure and approaches that are truly valid and reliable to measure the learning outcomes of
the students. The goal of the producing first class student must be commensurated by first class teaching instructions.
The assessment procedure used to assess students’ performance must possess high degree of discriminating effect so
that students’ categorization in term of their academic performance is highly reliable.
References
Blust, Adam. (1995). The Debate Over Outcome Based Education, News & Views, March 1995.
Briggs, David A. (1988). Alhambra High: A 'High Success' School. Pg. 46, 2: 10-11.
Brown, Alan S. (1988). Outcome-Based Education: A Success Story. Pg. 46, 2: 12.
Watson, P. (2002). The Role and Integration of Learning Outcomes into the Educational Process. Active Learning in
Higher Education 3(3), 205-219.
Bloom, B.S. (1977). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook I:
Cognitive Domain. New York: Longman.
Universiti Putra Malaysia. (2004). Module 1 Learning Outcomes Initiative, How to develop Outcome-Based
Programme. Centre for Academic Development (CADe), UPM.
Heimlich, J. E. & Norland, E. (2002). Teaching Style: Where Are We Now?. New Directions for Adult and Continuing
Education. No. 93: 17-25.
Ladd, P. & Ruby Jr., R. (1999). Learning Style and Adjustment Issues of International Students. Journal of Education
for Business 74, no. 6: 363-367.
Appendix
Appendix 1: Ministry of Higher Learning’s Learning Outcomes
i. Knowledge
- Demonstrate possession of a body of knowledge of the relevant discipline.
- Ability to apply the knowledge.
- Apply principles to new situation.
ii. Professionalism, Values, Attitudes, Ethics
- Possess technical knowledge and skills with commitment to a set of shared values.
- Have autonomy to enforce the values.
- Have responsibility to promote, protect and enhance the values for the benefit of the consumers, the profession, self
and society at large.
iii. Social skills and responsibility
- Able to participate in appropriate community actions in collaborative multidisciplinary and multi sectoral teams

151
 Vol. 1, No. 4 International Education Studies

- Demonstrate understanding and sensitivity to as well as respect of cultural diversity and beliefs.
iv. Psychomotor, practical and technical skills
- Possess knowledge, skills and attitudes for the effective and efficient execution of psychomotor, practical and
technical skills.
v. Communication skills
- Able to create an environment of sensitivity to cultural and personal factors for effective communication and
improved interactions with and among:
o Peers
o Supervisors
o Members of work team
o Colleagues
o Public
vi. Life long learning and information management
- Able to use ICT to assist in work processes.
- Able to anticipate and show willingness to participate in charge by reflecting on own limitations and self assess,
accepting peer evaluation and undertaking continuous self-directed study.
vii. Critical thinking and scientific approach
- Able to apply problem-solving process in learning.
- Synthesize data from different sources and apply probability theory and evidence to refine hypotheses.
viii. Managerial and entrepreneurial skills
- Ability to apply the principles of management in business activities.
- Able to access and use information from various sources for problem solving and decision-making.

152
International Education Studies November, 2008

Appendix 2: Percentage Perception Level of Attainment of Learning Outcomes through Courses

Learning Outcomes Cluster Semester I 2006/2007 Semester II 2006/2007
1 2 3 1 2 3
Life Long Learning Social Science 2.7 24.6 72.8 3.7 13.0 83.3
and Information Biosciences & 10.2 24.4 65.5 10.2 15.7 74.1
Management Medical
Physical Sciences & 8.9 26.2 64.9 7.5 21.5 71.0
Engineering
Communication Social Science 4.7 23.6 71.8 4.7 15.3 80.0
Skills Biosciences & 12.2 32.0 55.8 14.2 28.4 57.4
Medical
Physical Sciences & 8.4 8.4 54.0 15.1 32.8 52.2
Engineering
Critical Thinking and Social Science 3.7 30.6 65.8 5.1 26.5 68.4
Scientific Approach Biosciences & 8.1 26.9 65.0 7.1 22.3 70.6
Medical
Physical Sciences & 6.4 27.2 66.3 9.1 17.2 73.7
Engineering
Managerial and Social Science 19.6 41.2 39.2 20.0 34.4 45.6
Entrepreneurial Skills Biosciences & 32.0 29.9 38.1 35.5 32.5 32.0
Medical
Physical Sciences & 35.6 35.1 29.2 31.7 40.9 27.4
Engineering
Psychomotor / Social Science 15.6 32.2 52.2 18.1 31.6 50.2
Practical / Technical Biosciences & 14.2 19.3 66.5 12.7 21.8 65.5
Skills Medical
Physical Sciences & 10.9 29.7 59.4 14.0 21.0 65.1
Engineering
Knowledge Social Science 0.3 10.3 89.4 1.9 4.2 94.0
Biosciences & 2.5 10.2 87.3 2.0 6.1 91.9
Medical
Physical Sciences & 1.0 16.8 82.2 7.5 8.1 84.4
Engineering
Social skills and Social Science 3.0 21.3 75.7 4.2 10.2 85.6
Responsibility Biosciences & 11.7 30.5 57.9 14.2 24.4 61.4
Medical
Physical Sciences & 15.3 34.7 50.0 19.4 41.4 39.2
Engineering
Professionalism, Social Science 2.0 18.3 79.7 3.3 13.5 83.3
Values, Attitudes and Biosciences & 14.7 26.4 58.9 15.2 21.3 63.5
Ethics Medical
Physical Sciences & 14.4 31.7 54.0 14.0 38.2 47.8
Engineering
Total 10.8 25.5 62.6 12.1 22.6 65.3
Note: 1- Low 2-Moderate 3-High

153
Vol. 1, No. 4 International Education Studies

Appendix 3: Mean Score for the Attainment of Learning Outcomes through Courses by Clusters
Learning Outcomes Cluster Semester I Semester II
2006/2007 2006/2007
(Mean) (Mean)
Life Long Learning and Social Science 7.43 7.82
Information Management Biosciences & Medical 6.99 7.20
Physical Sciences & 6.97 7.28
Engineering
Communication Skills Social Science 7.35 7.64
Biosciences & Medical 6.47 6.45
Physical Sciences & 6.42 6.28
Engineering
Critical Thinking and Scientific Social Science 7.12 7.18
Approach Biosciences & Medical 6.97 7.13
Physical Sciences & 7.06 7.34
Engineering
Managerial and Entrepreneurial Social Science 5.64 5.83
Skills Biosciences & Medical 5.19 4.84
Physical Sciences & 4.64 4.75
Engineering
Psychomotor / Practical / Social Science 6.43 6.20
Technical Skills Biosciences & Medical 7.04 6.85
Physical Sciences & 6.65 6.78
Engineering
Knowledge Social Science 8.50 8.70
Biosciences & Medical 8.28 8.51
Physical Sciences & 8.14 7.90
Engineering
Social skills and Responsibility Social Science 7.63 8.06
Biosciences & Medical 6.54 6.46
Physical Sciences & 6.17 5.59
Engineering
Professionalism, Values, Social Science 7.79 7.86
Attitudes and Ethics Biosciences & Medical 6.64 6.55
Physical Sciences & 6.37 6.32
Engineering

154
International Education Studies November, 2008

Table 1. Learning Domains

Domain Learning Domains Teaching Strategies/ Teaching
approach
Cognitive Involves the acquisition of information and 1. Lecture
(“Thinking” domain) refers to the learner’s intellectual abilities, 2. One-to-one instruction
mental capacities and thinking processes.
3. Computer-based instruction
Affective Involves increasing internalization or 1. Case study
(“ Feeling” domain) commitment to feelings expressed as emotions, 2. Role-playing
interests, attitudes, values or beliefs.
3. Simulation
4. Games
5. Group discussion
Psychomotor Involve acquiring motor abilities and the 1. Demonstration
(“Skills” domain) capabilities to perform perceptual-motor tasks. 2. Practice
Table 1 illustrates the three domains: cognitive, affective and psychomotor domains. In the implementation, these are
the strategies that have been adopted to achieve higher level of the above three domains.

Table 2. Distribution of Respondents by Cluster

Cluster Semester I Semester II
2006/2007 2006/2007
n % n %
Social Sciences 301 43.0 215 36.0
Biosciences & Medical 197 28.1 197 32.9
Physical Sciences & Engineering 202 28.9 186 31.1
Total 700 100.0 598 100.0
n = number of response received
The response for the study is as presented in the above table. About 700 course lecturers responded from 1678 courses
offered (43.2%) in Semester I 2006/ 2007 and 598 course lecturers responded from 1691 courses offered (33.7%) in
Semester II 2006/ 2007.

Table 3. Distribution of Respondents by the Levels of Perception in Cognitive Domains by Clusters

Cluster Semester I 2006/2007 Semester II 2006/2007
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
% %
Social Science 2.3 4.3 17.9 24.6 19.9 30.9 2.3 5.1 22.3 19.5 20.5 26
Biosciences & 3.0 15.2 23.4 19.8 17.8 20.8 3.6 8.1 29.4 25.4 11.2 21.8
Medical
Physical 3.0 7.4 27.7 33.2 17.8 10.9 1.1 4.8 22.0 36.0 15.1 18.8
Sciences &
Engineering
Average 2.8 9.0 23.0 25.9 18.5 20.9 2.3 6.0 24.6 27.0 15.6 22.2
Key:
1- Knowledge
2- Comprehension
3- Application
4- Analysis

155
Vol. 1, No. 4 International Education Studies

5- Synthesis
6- Evaluation
Table 3 illustrates the following interpretation; (i) 25.9% (average) of the lecturers from Semester I 2006/2007
perceived that students were able to attain level 4 of the cognitive domains (i.e. analysis) in their. (ii) 27% (average) of
the lecturers from Semester II 2006/2007 perceived that students were able to attain level 4 of the cognitive domains (i.e.
analysis) in their learning. (iii) All levels of cognitive domains were fairly utilized by lecturers from all clusters. It
shows that fairly equal emphasis were given towards utilizing all the domains in cognitive skills.

Table 4. Distribution of Respondents by the Levels of Perception in Psychomotor Domains by Clusters

Cluster Semester I 2006/2007 Semester II 2006/2007
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
% %
Social 5.3 14.0 27.9 15.6 12.6 15.6 9.0 8.8 12.1 23.7 12.6 13.5 14.0 7.9
Science
Biosciences 8.6 8.1 28.4 25.4 14.2 9.6 5.6 4.6 10.2 24.9 37.1 7.1 12.2 0
& Medical
Physical 5.9 9.9 35.6 28.7 8.4 10.4 1.0 2.2 8.6 26.9 36.0 10.2 9.7 3.8
Sciences &
Engineering
Average 6.6 10.7 30.6 23.2 11.7 11.9 5.2 5.2 10.3 25.2 28.6 10.3 12.0 3.9
Key:
1- Perception
2- Set
3- Guided Response
4- Mechanism
5- Complex Overt Response
6- Adaptation
7- Origination
Table 4 illustrates that 30.6% of the lecturers (average) Semester I 2006/2007 generally perceived that their students
have achieved psychomotor domains of level 3 (Guided Response). In Semester II 2006/2007, 28.6% of the lecturers
(average) perceived that their students have achieved psychomotor domains of level 4 (Mechanism).

Table 5. Distribution of Respondents by the Levels of Perception in Affective Domains by Clusters

Cluster Semester I 2006/2007 Semester II 2006/2007
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
% %
Social Science 2.0 13.6 28.6 27.2 28.6 0.5 13.0 29.3 23.7 27.9
Biosciences & 2.0 17.8 35.0 29.4 15.7 3.0 13.2 41.1 27.4 13.2
Medical
Physical Sciences 3.5 16.3 47.5 24.8 7.9 3.2 18.8 39.2 28.0 8.1
& Engineering
Average 2.5 15.9 37.0 27.1 17.4 2.2 15.0 36.5 26.4 16.4
Key:
1- Receiving Phenomena
2- Responding to Phenomena
3- Valuing

156
International Education Studies November, 2008

4- Organizing Values
5- Internalizing Values
The above table illustrates that 37% of the lecturers (average) perceived the students have attained affective domains of
level 3 (Responding to Phenomena) in Semester I 2006/2007. 36.5% of the lecturers (average) from Semester II
2006/2007 perceived their students have also attained level 3 of the affective domains.

Table 6. Levels of Perception in Teaching and Learning Domains

Taxonomy Semester I 2006/2007 Semester II 2006/2007
Mean Level Taxonomy level Mean Level Taxonomy level
Cognitive 4.16 4 Analysis 4.07 4 Analysis
Psychomotor 3.82 4 Mechanism 3.63 4 Mechanism
Affective 3.45 3 Valuing 3.29 3 Valuing
Most of the lecturers perceived that the students have achieved cognitive domains of level 4 (Analysis), psychomotor
domains of level 4 (Mechanism) and affective domains of level 3 (Valuing). The analysis shows that the utilization of
each of the three domains was diminishing as they moved to Semester II 2006/2007.

Table 7. Analysis of Variance for different domains by cluster

Taxonomy Cluster Semester I 2006/2007 Semester II 2006/2007
Mean SD F Sig-F Mean SD F Sig-F
Cognitive Social Sciences 4.48 1.33 15.27 0.00* 4.16 1.59 0.97 0.38
Biosciences & 3.96 1.46 3.96 1.42
Medical
Physical 3.88 1.20 4.09 1.33
Sciences &
Engineering
Psychomotor Social Sciences 3.99 1.70 4.07 0.02* 3.61 1.99 1.05 0.35
Biosciences & 3.80 1.55 3.56 1.45
Medical
Physical 3.59 1.31 3.80 1.43
Sciences &
Engineering
Affective Social Sciences 3.67 1.09 14.55 0.00* 3.49 1.33 5.27 0.01*
Biosciences & 3.39 1.02 3.28 1.08
Medical
Physical 3.17 0.92 3.11 1.08
Sciences &
Engineering
Note: * Significant at 0.05
The means of the perception level of achievement in teaching and learning domains from Social Science cluster are as
follows; Cognitive - 4.48, Psychomotor - 3.99, Affective - 3.67. These are higher compared to those achieved by the
students from other clusters. This shows that the three major domains in teaching and learning were adequately applied
by all lecturers in their instructions.
There is a significant difference between the level of perception of utilization of teaching and learning domains by
lecturers from different clusters in Semester I 2006/2007 as presented in. For Semester II 2006/2007, it is seen that there
is no significant different between the levels of perception among lecturers form different clusters especially in the two
domains of cognitive and psychomotor.

157
Vol. 1, No. 4 International Education Studies

Table 8. Distribution of Respondents by the Level of Attainment of Learning Outcomes through Courses by Cluster
Cluster Semester I 2006/2007 Semester II 2006/2007
1 2 3 1 2 3
% %
Social Science 6.5 25.3 68.3 7.6 18.6 73.8
Biosciences & Medical 13.2 25.0 61.9 13.9 21.6 64.6
Physical Sciences & Engineering 12.6 26.2 57.5 14.8 27.6 57.6
Average 10.8 25.5 62.6 12.1 22.6 65.3
Note: 1- Low 2-Moderate 3-High
Majority of the lecturers perceived that the students are highly fluent in attaining all the eight elements of learning
outcomes as proposed by MoHE for all courses. It constitutes 62.6% of attainment in Semester I 2006/2007 and 65.3%
for Semester II 2006/2007 of the total samples.

Table 9. Mean Score for the Attainment of Learning Outcomes through Courses
Learning Outcomes through Courses Semester I 2006/2007 Semester II 2006/2007
Mean Score SD Mean Score SD
Life Long Learning and Information Management 7.17 2.03 7.45 2.19
Communication Skills 6.83 6.83 6.79 2.41
Critical Thinking and Scientific Approach 7.06 1.89 7.20 2.18
Managerial and Entrepreneurial Skills 5.23 2.65 5.18 2.77
Psychomotor / Practical / Technical Skills 6.66 2.49 6.59 2.72
Knowledge 8.33 1.57 8.37 1.92
Social skills and Responsibility 6.90 2.27 6.74 2.60
Professionalism, Values, Attitudes and Ethics 7.06 2.27 6.94 2.56
Note: 0-3 =Low, 4-6= Moderate, 7-10= High
The highest perception level goes to the KNOWLEDGE SKILLS where in both semester it was ranked the highest at
8.33 and 8.37 respectively (Table 9). Except for MANAGERIAL AND ENTREPRENEURIAL SKILL which ranked as
‘Low’ (i.e. 5.23 and 5.18 respectively) the rest of the learning outcomes were fairly perceived at ‘High’ levels of
achievement.

158
International Education Studies November, 2008

Table 10. Analysis of Variance for Learning Outcomes by Cluster

Taxonomy Cluster Semester I 2006/2007 Semester II 2006/2007
Mean SD F Sig-F Mean SD F Sig-F
Life Long Social Science 7.43 1.79 4.25 0.02* 7.82 1.79 5.09 0.01*
Learning and Biosciences & 6.99 2.22 7.20 2.49
Information Medical
Management
Physical Sciences 6.97 2.13 7.28 2.17
& Engineering
Communication Social Science 7.35 1.85 17.53 0.00* 7.64 1.90 20.86 0.00*
Skills Biosciences & 6.47 2.23 6.45 2.52
Medical
Physical Sciences 6.42 1.97 6.28 2.53
& Engineering
Critical Thinking Social Science 7.12 1.77 0.36 0.70 7.18 1.93 0.48 0.62
and Scientific Biosciences & 6.97 2.08 7.13 2.30
Approach Medical
Physical Sciences 7.06 1.89 7.34 2.27
& Engineering
Managerial and Social Science 5.64 2.55 8.94 0.00* 5.83 2.55 9.86 0.00*
Entrepreneurial Biosciences & 5.19 2.76 4.84 2.92
Skills Medical
Physical Sciences 4.64 2.59 4.75 2.71
& Engineering
Psychomotor / Social Science 6.43 2.54 3.61 0.03* 6.20 2.75 3.68 0.03*
Practical / Biosciences & 7.04 2.54 6.85 2.65
Technical Skills Medical
Physical Sciences 6.65 2.33 6.78 2.68
& Engineering
Knowledge Social Science 8.50 1.46 3.30 0.04* 8.70 1.55 9.79 0.00*
Biosciences & 8.28 1.67 8.51 1.75
Medical
Physical Sciences 8.14 1.60 7.90 2.29
& Engineering
Social skills and Social Science 7.63 1.89 31.31 0.00* 8.06 1.90 55.94 0.00*
Responsibility Biosciences & 6.54 2.35 6.46 2.60
Medical
Physical Sciences 6.17 2.38 5.59 2.64
& Engineering
Professionalism, Social Science 7.79 1.75 30.93 0.00* 7.86 1.96 23.66 0.00*
Values, Attitudes Biosciences & 6.64 2.54 6.55 2.74
and Ethics Medical
Physical Sciences 6.37 2.36 6.32 2.60
& Engineering
Note: * Significant at 0.05 level
There is a significant difference in the attainment of different learning outcomes (Life Long Learning and Information
Management, Communication Skills, Managerial and Entrepreneurial Skills, Psychomotor / Practical / Technical Skills,
Knowledge, Social skills and Responsibility and Professionalism, Values, Attitudes and Ethics) by lecturers from
different clusters in Semester I 2006/2007 and Semester II 2006/2007. On the other hand, there is no significant
difference in the attainment of learning outcomes in courses related to Critical Thinking and Scientific Approach among
different clusters.

159
Vol. 1, No. 4 International Education Studies

Psychomotor/ Practical/
Technical Skills

Life Long Learning &

Information Management

Communication Skills

Social Skills & Critical Thinking & Scientific Knowledge

Responsibility Approach

Managerial &
Entrepreneurial Skills

Professionalism, values,
attitudes, ethics

Figure 1. Categories of Learning Outcomes

This figure demonstrates the skills expected of each category of domains. These eight learning outcomes are the most
influential factors in providing quality education. Details are provided in the Appendix 1.

160