In corporate education, completion certificates alone do not pr
ove mastery of the curriculum or competency on the job. For risk and insurance professionals, learning outcomes m
ust involve sharper judgment, improved client results, and measurable growth in day-to-day performance, or the investment in education has failed to deliver real value.
Effective learning isn’t accidental; it is the result of purposeful instructional design and disciplined review of psychome
tric data. At the Risk & Insurance Education Alliance, we approach course design with intentionality and evidence-based frameworks. Every program begins
with a clear vision of what success should look like for the learner, taking into account job role, organization size, and tenure-related competencies. From
that foundation, our curriculum progresses from understanding to application, guiding participants to think critically, solve c
omplex problems, and apply knowledge directly to their professional practice.
We continually review learning data to ensure that our programs are creating measurable improvement for
both individual participants and the organizations they serve. Using evaluation tools such as pre- and p
ost-assessment comparisons, item analysis, and reliability testing, we ensure that every program delivers both educa
tional integrity and
performance impact. The result is learning experiences that empower professionals to serve clients, team mem
See more beautiful photo albums Here >>>
bers, and the broader insurance community with greater confidence and competence.
Backward Design – Beginning with the End in Mind
Truly effective course design begins with purposeful reflection on desired learning outcomes. Gr
ant Wiggins and Jay McTighe’s Backward Design model popularized
this approach, encouraging educators and training professionals to consider what they want the learner to be able to DO post-program.
This is an especially important tactic when designing curriculum for insurance and risk professionals, where technical acumen has a direct impact on
account performance. Yet too often, low-cost continuing education providers prioritize volume and compliance over learning best practices, focusing on fast and convenient content delivery instead of co
mpetency development. While this content may satisfy the requirements of state regulators, it rarely precipitates the behavioral change or financial results necessary to justify the return on investment.
The Risk & Insurance Education Alliance builds every course around defined competencies that align with industry standards and employer expectations. This a
pproach guarantees that learning outcomes are not theoretical but directly tied to performance metrics. By treating
curriculum planning as a form of risk management, we reduce the risk of wasted learning time and increase the probability of meaningful professional results.
Bloom’s Taxonomy – Defining and Structuring Learning Outcomes
A companion to the Backward Design framework, Bloom’s taxonomy, provides a six-level classification system for crafting learning objectives to assess content mastery at different levels of cognitio
n. This framework helps educators to differentiate between basic and advanced competencies, tailoring instruction to
the target audience of the program. Consider how this progression works for insurance and risk management courses, from simple recall of information to applyi
ng and evaluating it in real-world insurance scenarios:
Level 1 – Remember: Identify and define common property coverage terms.
Level 2 – Understand: Describe how insurance impacts claim settlement under a commercial property policy.
Level 3 – Apply: Interpret a policy’s exclusions to determine whether a loss scenario will be covered.
Level 4 – Analyze: Compare two policy forms to identify differences in coverage scope.
Level 5 – Evaluate: Assess competing coverage options to determine which best aligns with the client’s risk portfolio.
Level 6 – Create: Develop a comprehensive risk management plan for a client that integrates multiple lines of coverage and risk control strategies.