Objectives as Activities or as Content
Objectives as Activities or as Content
The four ways of stating objectives
- As activities the teacher will do.
- As topics, concepts, or content.
- As generalized patterns of behavior.
- As a behavior plus its area of application.
Way 1: teacher activities
- States what the teacher plans to do, not the change in learners.
- Lacks educational ends, so there is no way to judge it.
Way 2: topics and content
- Names the content area but not what learners should do with it.
- Desired changes stay uncertain, and activities cannot be planned.
There are four common ways to state an objective, and they are not equally good. Three of the four fail, each in its own way, and seeing why is the fastest route to the one form that works. This article takes the first two.
| Way of stating | Names the behavior? | Names the content? | Useful? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Teacher activities | No | No | No |
| Topics and content | No | Yes | No |
| Behavior patterns | Yes | No | No |
| Behavior plus content | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Way 1: objectives as activities the teacher will do
The first way states an objective as something the instructor will do: “to introduce mathematical operations,” “to introduce the concept of evolution,” “to demonstrate grouping and classification.” Each names an activity the teacher plans.
The trouble is that this describes the teacher, not the learner. Such statements may say what the teacher plans to do, but they lack educational ends. The purpose of education is a significant change in the behaviour patterns of learners, not the activities performed by teachers. If the objective only names a teacher activity, there is no way to judge whether that activity should be carried out, because the statement does not say what change it is meant to produce.
The fix is to state the objective as the expected change in learners. A statement of the change makes it possible to work out what activities would achieve it. Stated as a teacher activity, an objective gives no guidance for the further steps of selecting materials or planning methods, so it is not really an objective at all.
They describe what the teacher does, not the change in the learner
The purpose of education is a change in learners’ behaviour, not the teacher’s activity. Such statements lack educational ends, so there is no way to judge them or plan materials and methods.
Way 2: objectives as topics, concepts, or content
The second way states objectives as the topics, concepts, content elements, or generalizations to be dealt with in a course. An objective might be given simply as a topic, such as “matter and materials” or “energy.” Or it might be given as a generalization to be learned, such as “green plants change sunlight into food” or “energy can neither be created nor destroyed.”
These statements are an improvement in one respect: they indicate the area of content or subject to be taught. But they do not specify what learners are expected to do with that content. Knowing the topic is “energy” does not say whether learners should recall it, explain it, apply it, or design with it.
The result depends on how the content is stated. If stated as a generalization, the expectation is usually that learners must memorise it and be able to apply it to concrete examples in their lives, though even this is left implied. If stated as a bare topic, the desired changes among learners are even more uncertain, and instructional activities cannot be planned to achieve them. Either way, objectives stated as topics, concepts, or generalizations do not give a satisfactory basis for guiding the further development of the curriculum.
They name the content area but not what learners should do with it
Knowing the topic is “energy” leaves the desired change in learners uncertain, so activities cannot be planned. Content alone gives no satisfactory basis for developing the curriculum.
How was this article?