Nano Unit · one outcome, one sittingUnit Nano · satu hasil, satu duduk

Write one outcome you can actually assess

Tulis satu hasil pembelajaran yang benar-benar boleh ditaksir

Twenty minutes. One outcome from your own course, rewritten so that it names something you could watch a student do — and so that you know what evidence would prove it.

Dua puluh minit. Satu hasil pembelajaran daripada kursus anda sendiri, ditulis semula supaya ia menamakan sesuatu yang boleh anda lihat pelajar lakukan — dan supaya anda tahu bukti apa yang membuktikannya.

SizeSaizNano · 5 screensNano · 5 skrin

TimeMasa≈ 20 minutes≈ 20 minit

You will produceAnda akan hasilkanOne rewritten outcomeSatu hasil yang ditulis semula

FeedsMenyuapUnit 2 · SPEC.mdUnit 2 · SPEC.md

The one outcome · Core conceptSatu hasil · Konsep teras

By the end of these five screens

Pada akhir lima skrin ini

1

Rewrite one outcome from your own course so that it names an observable performance, and state the evidence that would prove it. Menulis semula satu hasil pembelajaran daripada kursus anda sendiri supaya ia menamakan prestasi yang boleh diperhati, dan menyatakan bukti yang akan membuktikannya. C6 · own case

One outcome only. That restraint is what makes this finishable in one sitting.Satu hasil sahaja. Kekangan itulah yang menjadikannya boleh disiapkan dalam satu duduk.

DefinitionTakrifan

An assessable outcome names a performance you could watch, mark or read — and it carries, in the same breath, the evidence that would prove it. An outcome describing a state inside the learner's head is not assessable, however true it may be, because nothing about it can be observed.

Sebuah hasil pembelajaran yang boleh ditaksir menamakan prestasi yang boleh anda perhati, nilai atau baca — dan ia membawa, dalam nafas yang sama, bukti yang akan membuktikannya. Hasil yang memerihalkan keadaan dalam fikiran pelajar tidak boleh ditaksir, betapa benar sekalipun, kerana tiada apa padanya yang boleh diperhati.

❌ Not assessable

❌ Tidak boleh ditaksir

“Students will understand the importance of data privacy.”

“Pelajar akan memahami kepentingan privasi data.”

Nothing here can be watched. Two students could both “understand” and produce completely different work, and you would have no basis to mark one above the other.

Tiada apa di sini boleh diperhati. Dua pelajar boleh sama-sama “memahami” dan menghasilkan kerja yang sama sekali berbeza, dan anda tiada asas untuk menilai seorang lebih tinggi daripada yang lain.

✅ Assessable

✅ Boleh ditaksir

“Differentiate three privacy risks in a system you use, and justify which is most serious for its users.”

“Membezakan tiga risiko privasi dalam sistem yang anda gunakan, dan mewajarkan yang mana paling serius bagi penggunanya.”

You can see the three. You can read the justification. And the evidence is obvious: a short written case with a defended position.

Anda boleh melihat ketiga-tiganya. Anda boleh membaca justifikasinya. Dan buktinya jelas: satu kes bertulis pendek dengan pendirian yang dipertahankan.

The three-part testUjian tiga bahagian

An outcome is finished when it has all three: an observable verb, an object the verb acts on, and a condition or context that bounds it. Miss the verb and it cannot be marked. Miss the condition and every student answers a different question.

Sesuatu hasil selesai apabila ia mempunyai ketiga-tiganya: kata kerja boleh diperhati, objek yang dikenakan kata kerja itu, dan syarat atau konteks yang membatasinya. Tiada kata kerja, ia tidak boleh dinilai. Tiada syarat, setiap pelajar menjawab soalan yang berbeza.

Worked example · Contoh dikerjakanContoh dikerjakan

One rewrite, step by step

Satu penulisan semula, langkah demi langkah

BeforeSebelum

“Students will know the principles of sustainable design.”

“Pelajar akan mengetahui prinsip reka bentuk lestari.”

Applying the three-part testMenerapkan ujian tiga bahagian

Verb — “know” cannot be watched. What would a student actually do with these principles? Evaluate a design against them. That is the verb.

Object — not “the principles” in the abstract, but a real design the student chooses.

Condition — how many principles, and what must they produce? Three, and a written judgement with a recommendation.

Kata kerja — “mengetahui” tidak boleh diperhati. Apa yang pelajar akan lakukan dengan prinsip ini? Menilai sesuatu reka bentuk berdasarkannya. Itulah kata kerjanya.

Objek — bukan “prinsip” secara abstrak, tetapi reka bentuk sebenar yang dipilih pelajar.

Syarat — berapa prinsip, dan apa yang mesti mereka hasilkan? Tiga, dan satu pertimbangan bertulis beserta cadangan.

AfterSelepas

“Evaluate a building or product of your choice against three principles of sustainable design, and recommend one change with reasons.”

Evidence: a 600-word case with a named artefact and a defended recommendation.

“Menilai sebuah bangunan atau produk pilihan anda berdasarkan tiga prinsip reka bentuk lestari, dan mencadangkan satu perubahan beserta alasannya.”

Bukti: satu kes 600 patah perkataan dengan artifak bernama dan cadangan yang dipertahankan.

One variation — the same outcome at a higher level. Satu variasi — hasil yang sama pada aras lebih tinggi. Swap “evaluate … and recommend” for “design a revision that satisfies all three principles, and defend the trade-offs you accepted.” The object and condition barely move; the verb does all the work. This is why the verb is the first thing to fix and the last thing to compromise on. Tukar “menilai … dan mencadangkan” kepada “mereka bentuk semakan yang memenuhi ketiga-tiga prinsip, dan mempertahankan pertukaran nilai yang anda terima.” Objek dan syarat hampir tidak berubah; kata kerja yang melakukan segalanya. Inilah sebabnya kata kerja ialah perkara pertama untuk dibetulkan dan perkara terakhir untuk dikompromi.

Practice Lab · Makmal AmaliMakmal Amali

Now do it with your own outcome

Sekarang lakukan dengan hasil pembelajaran anda sendiri

Open your syllabus, find the weakest outcome in it — the one you would struggle to mark fairly — and paste it into the prompt below. Ten minutes.

Buka sukatan anda, cari hasil pembelajaran yang paling lemah — yang anda akan sukar menilainya dengan adil — dan tampalkannya ke dalam gesaan di bawah. Sepuluh minit.

✏️ PN — Rewrite one outcome

One outcome, one sitting. Paste your real one, not an example.

You are an instructional designer working on outcome-based course design.
Do not ask permission to begin; produce the artefact.

MY OUTCOME, exactly as it currently appears in my syllabus:
"[PASTE YOUR OUTCOME HERE]"

CONTEXT
Course: [CODE AND TITLE]
Learners: [WHO THEY ARE, AND WHAT THEY WILL NOT HAVE]
Taxonomy level this outcome is mapped to: [e.g. C4 analyse, A4 organise]
Language of learner-facing text: [LANGUAGE(S)]

TASK — do all four steps, in this order, and show your working.

STEP 1 — DIAGNOSE.
Test my outcome against three parts and report PASS or FAIL for each,
quoting the exact words that carry it:
  VERB      — is it a performance that can be watched, marked or read?
  OBJECT    — is there something specific the verb acts on?
  CONDITION — is there a context or limit that stops every learner
              answering a different question?
Banned verbs, which automatically FAIL the verb test:
understand, know, be aware of, appreciate, learn about, be familiar with.

STEP 2 — REWRITE.
Produce THREE rewrites at the taxonomy level I named. Each must:
  - open with an observable verb at that level;
  - act on something the learner CHOOSES for themselves, so that no two
    learners could submit the same work;
  - state a condition — a number, a context, a required product.
Label them A, B, C. Do not rank them; they are alternatives, not drafts.

STEP 3 — NAME THE EVIDENCE.
For each rewrite, state in one line what a learner would hand in that
would prove it, and roughly how long that artefact is.
If a rewrite has no plausible evidence, say so and discard it.

STEP 4 — COST IT.
Estimate the learner hours each rewrite would demand, including the
reading and the producing. Flag any that will not fit a normal week.

RULES
- Do not soften my original to make it look acceptable. If it fails, say it fails.
- Do not invent facts about my course. If you need something I have not given,
  write [CHECK: ...] rather than guessing.
- Output the four steps only. No preamble, no closing summary.

Why it is shaped this wayMengapa ia berbentuk begini

S1Diagnosing before rewriting forces the model to name what is broken. Ask only for a rewrite and you get a polished sentence with no explanation you can reuse on the next outcome.Mendiagnosis sebelum menulis semula memaksa model menamakan apa yang rosak. Minta penulisan semula sahaja dan anda dapat ayat yang licin tanpa penjelasan yang boleh diguna semula pada hasil seterusnya.
S2Three alternatives, not ranked. Ranked drafts invite you to take the top one. Alternatives make you choose — and choosing is where your judgement about your own learners enters.Tiga alternatif, tidak disusun. Draf yang disusun mengundang anda mengambil yang teratas. Alternatif memaksa anda memilih — dan pemilihan itulah tempat pertimbangan anda tentang pelajar anda masuk.
S3An outcome with no plausible evidence is not an outcome, it is an aspiration. Making the model discard those is cheaper than discovering it at marking time.Hasil yang tiada bukti munasabah bukan hasil, ia cita-cita. Membiarkan model membuangnya lebih murah daripada menemuinya ketika penilaian.
S4Costing it early stops you writing an outcome that quietly demands eight hours in a week that has three.Menganggar kosnya lebih awal menghalang anda menulis hasil yang senyap-senyap menuntut lapan jam dalam minggu yang hanya ada tiga.
Rule“Do not soften my original” is the line that matters most. Without it, models are agreeable — and an agreeable diagnosis is worthless.“Jangan lembutkan hasil asal saya” ialah baris paling penting. Tanpanya, model bersifat menyenangkan — dan diagnosis yang menyenangkan tidak bernilai.

Expected output (illustrative)Output dijangka (ilustrasi)

STEP 1
VERB — FAIL · “know” · not observable
OBJECT — PASS · “the principles of sustainable design”
CONDITION — FAIL · no number, no context

STEP 2 · A — Evaluate a building or product of your choice against three principles…
STEP 3 · A — 600-word case, named artefact, defended recommendation
STEP 4 · A — ≈ 2.5 h · fits a normal week

💡 The rewrite is a proposal, not a verdict. You know your learners and your programme; the model does not. Take what is right and overrule what is not.💡 Penulisan semula itu cadangan, bukan keputusan muktamad. Anda kenal pelajar dan program anda; model tidak. Ambil yang betul dan tolak yang tidak.

Check & close · Semak & tutupSemak & tutup

Two questions, then you are done

Dua soalan, kemudian anda selesai

1. Which of these outcomes could you mark fairly?1. Antara hasil berikut, yang manakah boleh anda nilai dengan adil?

✓ Yes. It has all three parts: an observable verb (compare, judge), an object the learner chooses, and a condition that bounds it. You could put two students' answers side by side and defend a difference in mark.✓ Ya. Ia mempunyai ketiga-tiga bahagian: kata kerja boleh diperhati (membandingkan, menilai), objek yang dipilih pelajar, dan syarat yang membatasinya. Anda boleh meletakkan jawapan dua pelajar bersebelahan dan mempertahankan perbezaan markah.

Look at the opening verb. Appreciate, be familiar with and understand all describe something inside the learner's head — you cannot watch any of them, so you cannot defend a mark. Only one option names a performance.Lihat kata kerja pembuka. Menghargai, membiasakan diri dan memahami semuanya memerihalkan sesuatu dalam fikiran pelajar — anda tidak dapat melihatnya, jadi anda tidak dapat mempertahankan markah. Hanya satu pilihan menamakan prestasi.

2. Your rewrite reads: “Analyse a case study of your choice using the framework taught in week 4.” What is still missing?2. Penulisan semula anda berbunyi: “Menganalisis kajian kes pilihan anda menggunakan kerangka yang diajar pada minggu 4.” Apa yang masih tiada?

✓ Right. The verb, object and condition are all there — but “analyse” could be a paragraph or a portfolio. Naming the artefact and its rough size is what makes the outcome markable and what lets you cost it against the week's hours.✓ Betul. Kata kerja, objek dan syarat semuanya ada — tetapi “menganalisis” boleh jadi satu perenggan atau satu portfolio. Menamakan artifak dan saiz anggarannya menjadikan hasil itu boleh dinilai dan membolehkan anda menganggarkan kosnya berbanding jam minggu itu.

Check the three parts again: “analyse” is observable, “a case study of your choice” is the object, “using the framework from week 4” is the condition. All three are present. What is missing sits outside the three-part test — it is what the learner hands you.Semak semula tiga bahagian: “menganalisis” boleh diperhati, “kajian kes pilihan anda” ialah objek, “menggunakan kerangka minggu 4” ialah syarat. Ketiga-tiganya ada. Yang tiada berada di luar ujian tiga bahagian — iaitu apa yang diserahkan pelajar kepada anda.

In one lineDalam satu baris

“If you cannot watch it, you cannot mark it — and if you cannot name the evidence, you have not finished writing it.”

“Jika anda tidak boleh melihatnya, anda tidak boleh menilainya — dan jika anda tidak boleh menamakan buktinya, anda belum selesai menulisnya.”

Where this sitsDi mana ia berada

← Needs nothing before it

← Tiada prasyarat

This is a deliberate entry point. You need one syllabus and twenty minutes — no prior unit, no setup, no account.

Ini titik masuk yang disengajakan. Anda perlukan satu sukatan dan dua puluh minit — tiada unit terdahulu, tiada persediaan, tiada akaun.

Feeds forward to →

Menyuap ke hadapan →

Unit 2 — Compiling your curriculum. The outcome you just rewrote goes straight into the CLO field of your SPEC.md. Do this for every weak outcome and half of P1's work is already done.

Unit 2 — Mengkompil kurikulum anda. Hasil yang baru anda tulis semula terus masuk ke medan HPK dalam SPEC.md anda. Lakukan ini untuk setiap hasil yang lemah dan separuh kerja P1 sudah selesai.

👥 Show your rewrite to whoever teaches the next course in the sequence👥 Tunjukkan penulisan semula anda kepada pengajar kursus seterusnya dalam turutan 🔁 Do one more tomorrow. Two a week finishes a syllabus in a month.🔁 Buat satu lagi esok. Dua seminggu menyiapkan satu sukatan dalam sebulan.

Before you close thisSebelum anda menutupnya

Paste your chosen rewrite into a file called SPEC.md under a heading ## CLOs. That file is now started. It is a small thing — but the small thing done regularly is what finishes a course, and the one done all at once is what never gets started.

Tampalkan penulisan semula pilihan anda ke dalam fail bernama SPEC.md di bawah tajuk ## CLOs. Fail itu kini sudah bermula. Ia perkara kecil — tetapi perkara kecil yang dilakukan secara berterusan itulah yang menyiapkan sesebuah kursus, dan yang dilakukan sekali gus itulah yang tidak pernah bermula.