READ | TEACHING @ | COURSE PREPARATION
Universal Design | Course Content | Course Goals | Structuring an Effective Course | Selecting Learning Activities | The Syllabus
THE
Importance
of Course Goals
Among the most important course decisions is the identification of
course goals.
Without clear course goals, the following results are likely:- The instructor will have difficulty selecting appropriate subject matter, materials, and teaching methods.
- The instructor will have difficulty staying on topic throughout the course and selecting appropriate topics to be tested.
- Students will complain that the course is irrelevant, that the material is not related to their personal educational goals or to any other goals they can recognize as being important.
- Students will complain that the tests are unfair; one topic is assigned, another is taught, and a third is covered on the tests.
- Students will complain that they do not know what to study since no priorities among topics are provided.
- Students will
complain that the
course is disorganized, that the topics do not fit together, and that there
is no clear direction.
On the other hand, clear
goals enhance
the possibility that the following results will occur:
- Teaching will be more focused and precise. Instructors will have subjected the course to a thorough analysis and will have selected on purpose what they expect the students to learn in the course.
- It will be easy to identify points where learning needs to be monitored or tested.
- It will be possible to confirm that student needs are being met.
- Instructors will be aware of different teaching and learning styles. One can specify the product (which may reduce test and grade anxiety) and make an intelligent choice of the appropriate teaching and learning process.
- Students will always
have a clear
statement of the purpose and aims of the course to turn to when
they are studying
or unsure of the course’s aims. They will find it easier to progress
through the course in an organized manner.
In short, with well-defined course
goals there is a clear communication of intent on the part of the
teacher regarding
what he or she is trying to teach, what the students are going to be expected
to be able to do, how their achievement will be measured, and what
will be accepted
as evidence that they have achieved the goals.
Instructional Objectives
Over the years,
educators have approached
goal setting in a variety of ways. During the decades when learning
theory was
characterized by a Behaviorist approach, educators urged teachers
to set broad
goals and then develop very precise instructional objectives for each goal.
According to Robert Mager (1962), an instructional objective is
“an intent
communicated by a statement describing a proposed change in a learner—a
statement of what the learner is to be like when he has
successfully completed
a learning experience.” Teachers were encouraged to state
objectives very
narrowly and to include measures specifying how attainment of the objective
would be judged; for example, “The student will be able to
draw the structures
of these chemical compounds to 100% accuracy when compared with the textbook
figures.”As learning theory focused on more
holistic ways of thinking about learning, educators began to think
differently
about objectives. Eisner (1994), for example, stressed that during inquiry or
discovery learning, one wants to be open-ended about what might
result. He substituted
the term “instructional objectives” with the term
“expressive
outcomes.” Today, most educators agree that good
instructional objectives
should neither be so narrowly stated that they represent the
intended curriculum
mechanistically nor so generally stated that they lend little clarity to the
intended goals. They should not discourage creativity on the part of either
teacher or learner, nor should they take away the need for the
teacher to communicate
the “challenge” of studying and learning to her or his students.
Other dangers to be aware of are objectives that insult
students’ intelligence,
that are restricted to lower-level cognitive skills, that seem mechanistic or
dehumanizing, or that result in overconcentration on the aspects of a subject
while the students miss the “big picture.”
Loosely stated
objectives—such
as “The students in Theatre 100 will understand what makes
good theatre”—are
not especially useful. It is generally better to refer to a
specific realization
or ability that the teacher wants his or her students to gain as a result of
their course. An example of a well-stated objective might be the following:
“The students in Physics 101 will demonstrate awareness of
the importance
of safety in the laboratory by learning and completing six standard
precautionary
steps before beginning each of the experiments in the course.”
Many educators evaluate
their instructional
objectives using the work of Benjamin Bloom. Bloom (1956) classified various
abilities and behaviors that correlate with cognitive learning
objectives into
a taxonomy (now commonly referred to as Bloom’s
Taxonomy of Learning) that represents the thinking processes required of
students as a continuum moving from the simple to the complex. This hierarchy
can serve as a classification scheme for constructing course objectives since
it focuses on the way a student acquires and uses knowledge in any
subject area.
It includes the following levels, starting from the bottom:
Knowledge. The
lowest level.
Primarily concerns the students’ ability to memorize or recall certain
specific facts. A sample knowledge objective is: “Students can define
‘osmosis.’”
Comprehension. Involves
the ability to interpret, paraphrase, and extrapolate, thus demonstrating the
students’ basic understanding of ideas that they did not originate. A
sample comprehension objective is: “Students can give
examples of loosely
coupled systems.”
Application.
Includes activities
in which the student applies concepts and principles to new and/or practical
situations. A sample application objective is: “Students can
use the formula
to predict economic effects.”
Analysis.
Concerns breaking
down a piece of information into its constituent parts, differentiating and
discriminating. A sample analysis objective is: “Students can diagram
musical variations in a given composition.”
Synthesis. Involves the
blending of elements and parts in order to form a whole. Students should be
able to create a structural pattern that was not previously present. A sample
syntheses objective is: “Students can summarize the research literature
on genetic engineering.”
Evaluation. The highest
level. Students might judge the value of a work, the logical consistency of
written data, or the adequacy of someone else’s conclusions. A sample
evaluation objective is: “Students can judge the adequacy of research
claims according to the supporting data.”
If the above are used when formulating objectives, it should be possible to analyze which of the course objectives require higher-order student behavior (application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation) and which center around lower-order objectives (knowledge and comprehension). Most instructional specialists argue that effective objectives (and well-designed courses) will almost always include some higher order objectives and not center exclusively around retention and understanding. Likewise, in most curricula there are foundational knowledge and comprehension requirements that must be achieved before higher-order objectives can be addressed.
 previous page |
