At the beginning of the course, I listed for myself several desired outcomes. However, as happens in most courses that I teach, I modified the list as the course went on. Moreover, I would argue that some of the desired outcomes for the course, were never explicitly stated, although in reflection they can be recognized. There are myriad reasons for changing outcomes, the main one being a recognition of knowledge that the students lack. My initial list, was made early on in the course from my course diary. As a habit, I do not include all of my desired outcomes on the course syllabus, as I believe that some outcomes are better enacted if the students come to see the importance of these outcomes on their own.
Initial List: (compiled from course notes). My initial list of desired outcomes broke into two pieces: what I have termed process goals and content goals, although these words should be looked at pretty loosely. (I dislike the dichotomy of syntactic knowledge and substantive knowledge found in Schwab.) In the course syllabus, only the process goals are listed, although the sequence of topics in the course are listed. Clicking on the assessment link at the end of each, will lead you to my assessment of whether this goal was achieved and the reasons for this assessment.
In truth, I would say that all of these outcomes were outcomes that I desired by the end of the course, however, I would say that there were two additional outcomes.
The first of these was added after the second day of class (see the first snapshot of the course), when I discovered that some of the students had never used technology to solve problems.
The second was there from the beginning of the course (and in fact from about the 2nd time the course ran), but had never been explicitly codified. In fact, this last outcome is probably the central process theme of the class.