Evaluating Student Learning Outcomes Using Kolb Learning Style Inventory
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11113/ijbes.v13.n1.1464Keywords:
Student Learning Outcomes (SLO), Learning Styles, Architecture, Design Studio, Power Verb, Action VerbAbstract
Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) play a crucial role in contemporary educational curricula. While a considerable body of research has focused on the development and effectiveness of SLOs, there has been limited exploration of their use for examining other academic phenomena. A school's teaching philosophy is of critical importance, and course content needs to be designed in alignment with this philosophy. Hypothesizing that the SLOs serve as a concise representation of the course content and a reflection of the school's underlying philosophy, this study proposes a methodology for evaluating SLOs as part of a broader goal to assess course content, given that SLOs provide measurability. Kolb's Learning Style Inventory (KLSI) was used as a tool, as it has been cited by scholars for its potential to provide insights into the perspectives of different types of learners. This includes students in various disciplines including architecture, the chosen discipline of this research. A questionnaire, designed by integrating KLSI and SLOs was administered in a case study of architectural design studios. Key findings suggest that the method demonstrates its potential to assess SLOs from the perspective of various types of learners. This includes, but is not limited to, determining whether the SLOs address diverse learner types across various academic levels, whether they prioritize specific learner types at different levels, and whether they maintain a consistent focus on particular learner types throughout all academic years. Additionally, a supporting finding suggests that this approach may provide rational justifications for the SLOs within architectural design studios, highlighting challenges in fully adhering to certain established standards. In this way, this paper introduces a novel application of SLOs in academic contexts and aims to contribute to the alignment of course content with the school’s teaching philosophies, while potentially influencing student intake policies within the field of architecture.
References
Adam, S. (2004). Using learning outcomes: A consideration of the nature, role, application and implications for European education of employing 'learning outcomes' at the local, national and international levels. United Kingdom Bologna Seminar, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Adam, S. (2006). An introduction to learning outcomes: A consideration of the nature, function, and position of learning outcomes in the creation of the European Higher Education Area. Retrieved on 15 December 2025 from https://pedagogie- universitaire.blogs.usj.edu.lb/wp content/blogs.dir/43/files/2013/03/An introduction-of-learning-outcomes.pdf.
Biggs, J. (2003). "Teaching for Quality Learning at University." Open University Press.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. 1: Cognitive domain. New York: McKay.
Boye, A. (2024, March). How do I Create an Effective Syllabus?. Retrieved on 15 December 2025 from https://www.depts.ttu.edu/tlpdc/Resources/Teaching_resources/TLPDC_teaching_resources/SyllabusWhitepaper_May2024.pdf
CSA, California State University. (2024). Adapted from California State University, Bakersfield, PACT Outcomes Assessment Handbook (1999).
Chism, N. V. N. (2007). "Self-Assessment and Peer Review in Higher Education." New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2007(109): 5–20.
CLO. (2024). Creating learning outcomes. Retrieved on 15 December 2025 from https://www.bu.edu/provost/files/2017/06/Creating-Learning-Outcomes-Stanford.pdf.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Research methods in education. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539.
Demirbas, O. & Demirkan, H. (2003). Focus on architectural design process through learning styles. Design Studies. 24: 437-456. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(03)00013-9.
Dovey, K. (2010). Architectural Education and the Pedagogical Issues in Contemporary Design Schools. International Journal of Architectural Research, 4(3): 121-132.
Entwistle, N. (2005). Learning outcomes and ways of thinking across contrasting disciplines and settings in higher education. The Curriculum Journal, 16(1): 67–82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0958517042000336818.
Felder, R.M. and Silverman, L.K. 1988. Learning styles and teaching styles in engineering education. Engineering Education, 78: 674 – 681.
Gardner, H. (1993). "Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences." Basic Books.
Geddes, L. (2023), How to successfully transition students into college: From traps to triumph, Routledge (1st edition). ISBN-10: 1642672890, ISBN-13: 978-1642672893
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2009). The integration of academic and vocational higher education: A critical analysis of the Israeli experience. Higher Education Policy, 22(3): 301-319.
Joy, S., & Kolb, D. A. (2009). Are there cultural differences in learning style? International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 33: 69–85.
Khan, T. H. (2023). Testing students’ learning outcomes (SLO)’s adaptability to all types of learners in architectural design studios. 30th Annual HBCU Faculty Development Network Conference, October 26-28, Houston, US.
Khan, T. H., Ahmad, A. S. bin, & Khan, M. A. A. S. (2012, November 20–22). Students’ learning style in architecture: A case study in UTM, Malaysia. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Science, Technology and Social Sciences (ICSTSS 2012). Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia.
Knight, P. T., & Yorke, M. (2004). Learning, curriculum and employability in higher education. Routledge.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as a source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall Inc.
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2009). The learning way: Meta-cognitive aspects of experiential learning. Simulation Gaming, 40(3): 297-327.
Kumar, S., & Maiti, S. (2016). Evaluating Architectural Education and the Need for Reform: A Global Perspective. Journal of Architectural Education, 70(2), 79-85.
Larsen, R. W. (2011). Developing course learning outcomes. Retrieved on 15 December 2025 from https://www.mus.edu/Qtools/CCN/Developing Course Learning Outcomes.pdf
Lattuca, L. R., & Stark, J. S. (2009). "Shaping the College Curriculum: Academic Plans in Context." Jossey-Bass.
Long, H., Kerr, B. A., Emler, T. E., & Birdnow, M. (2022). A Critical Review of Assessments of Creativity in Education. Review of Research in Education, 46(1): 288-323. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X221084326
Lueth, P. L. (2008). The architectural design studio as a learning environment: A qualitative exploration of architecture design student learning experiences in design studios from first- through fourth-year. https://doi.org/10.31274/rtd-180813-16991.
Mahajan, M., & Singh, M. K. S. (2017). Importance and benefits of learning outcomes. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOHS-JHSS), 22(3): 65-67. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Manvender Kaur Sarjit Singh/publication/315637432_Importance_and_Benefits_of_Learning_Outcomes/links/599c40d1aca272dff12b6eec/Importance-and-Benefits-of-Learning-Outcomes.pdf.
McLean, M., Abbas, M., & McDonald, L. (2019). Developing Student-Centered Learning Environments in Higher Education: Supporting Student Engagement and Success. BMC Medical Education, 19(1): 7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1550-x
Northwood, D. (2013). Learning outcomes: some reflections on their value and potential drawbacks. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 11: 137-142.
Powell, D. C., & Saint-Germain, M. (2016). Student learning outcome assessment in NASPAA programs: A review of validity and reliability. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 22(4): 507–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/15236803.2016.12002263.
Ruhl, C. (2024). Bloom’s taxonomy of learning. Simply Psychology. Retrieved on 15 December 2025 from https://www.simplypsychology.org/blooms-taxonomy.htmlRetrieved date?
Schön, D. A. (1983). "The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action." Basic Books.
Schuh, J. H., & Upcraft, M. L. (2012). Assessment Methods for Student Affairs. Jossey-Bass.
UA, The University of Arizona. (2021, June 18). Writing meaningful and measurable learning outcomes. UCATT. https://ucatt.arizona.edu/news/writing-meaningful-and-measurable-learning-outcomes
UNO. (2024). Student learning outcomes. The University of New Orleans. Retrieved on 15 December 2025 from https://www.uno.edu/office-academic-programs/outcomes.
Weimer, M. (2013). Learner-Centered Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice. Jossey-Bass. This book provides an in-depth exploration of the shift toward learner-centered teaching, where the focus is on enhancing student engagement, autonomy, and learning outcomes.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design. ASCD.
Wong, C. S. (2023), Inside the Studio: A Closer Look at Studio-Based Learning in Architecture Education, International Journal of Social Science and Education Research Studies, 3(4): 600-607, ISSN(print): 2770-2782, ISSN(online): 2770-2790, DOI: https://doi.org/10.55677/ijssers/V03I4Y2023-10
Wood, A. (2017 26). Architecture as a social science?. Architecture and Education. Retrieved on 15 December 2025 from https://architectureandeducation.org/2015/10/27/architecture-as-a-social-science/. Retrieved date?
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 International Journal of Built Environment and Sustainability
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright of articles that appear in International Journal of Built Environment and Sustainability belongs exclusively to Penerbit Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (Penerbit UTM Press). This copyright covers the rights to reproduce the article, including reprints, electronic reproductions or any other reproductions of similar nature.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- This Journal applies Creative Commons Licenses of CC-BY-NC-SA
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
