Hall of Fame
John Biggs
J Biggs & Collis, published ‘Evaluating
the Quality of Learning – the SOLO taxonomy’ (1982).
Taking output from hundreds of learners of different ages, across
a range of different subjects, they identified consistent sets of
learner output. They put this into a five-stage taxonomy, claiming
that it applies to any content.
Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes (SOLO)
| 1.
Pre-structural |
Learners acquire bits
of unconnected information, which have no organisation and
make no senseTypical written work: Doesn’t address the
question/task, at best restates the question, a series of
unrelated facts, uses only small amount of information available,
rarely reaches conclusion.
|
| 2. Uni-structural |
Learners make simple and obvious
connections, but show little evidence that their significance
has been graspedTypical written work: Addresses the question
in a limited way, rarely makes explicit links between bits
of information, writes in a descriptive fashion, when a conclusion
is reached it is done quickly based on very little information.
|
| 3. Multi-structural |
Learners make a number of connections,
but meta-connections between them are missed, as is their
significance for the wholeTypical written work: Uses two or
more pieces of data or information, often orders the data
but fails to explain links between different sets of data,
ignores any inconsistencies, some simple recognition of cause
and effect.
|
| 4. Relational |
Learners appreciate the significance
of the parts in relation to the wholeTypical written work:
Begins to link data/information in coherent fashion, reaches
conclusions that are consistent with available data, begins
to make connections between different sets of data and to
theorise/offer explanations, uses most of information available,
makes cause and effect judgements.
|
| 5. Extended
abstract |
Learners make connections both within
and beyond the subject area showing they are able to generalise
and transfer the principles and ideasTypical written work: Includes
information and concepts that were not ‘givens’,
number of possible hypotheses considered, assumptions made based
on deductive reasoning, a number of plausible explanations without
feeling the need to reach a firm conclusion – instead,
justifies a number of possible outcomes. |
Conclusion
This is a useful model but in reality, learners and
learning may be a little less layered and form a more complex set
of relationships across these layers. However, it can be useful
to judge a learner’s progress with reference to these five
stages of learning. As a grand theory it has its place, as a practical
model for design it is too general.
Bibliography
‘Evaluating the Quality of Learning –
the SOLO taxonomy’ 1982)
|
