Objectives as Behavior Patterns
Objectives as Behavior Patterns
Way 3: generalized behaviors
- States objectives as broad behaviors: critical thinking, interest, social attitudes, appreciation.
- Indicates the kind of change education should bring, which is a real improvement.
Why it still fails
- It omits the content to which the behavior applies.
- It omits the area of life in which the behavior is to be used.
- A behavior with no content cannot guide curriculum or instruction.
The third way of stating objectives looks more promising than the first two, because it finally talks about the learner. It states objectives as generalized patterns of behaviour: “to develop critical thinking,” “to develop interest,” “to develop social attitudes,” “to develop appreciation.” Each names a kind of change in the learner, which the activity and content forms never did.
What this way gets right, and what it misses
The strength is real. These statements indicate that education is expected to bring about a change, and they name the kind of change: thinking critically, taking interest, holding an attitude, appreciating something. That is a genuine step up from naming a teacher activity or a bare topic.
But it stops short. Objectives stated as generalized patterns of behaviour fail to indicate specifically the content to which the behaviour applies and the area of life in which the behaviour is to be used. “Develop critical thinking” does not say critical thinking about what. “Develop appreciation” does not say appreciation of what, in what situation.
This gap is not a small one. It is worthless to talk about developing critical thinking without any reference to content and to the kind of problems to be solved. Critical thinking about a science experiment, a historical claim, and a personal decision are different in practice, and a teacher cannot plan for “critical thinking” in general. The same holds for attitudes and appreciation: until the objective names what the attitude is toward and where it applies, a teacher has nothing concrete to teach.
It names a change in the learner, such as critical thinking or appreciation
This is a real improvement over teacher activities or bare topics, because it finally describes the learner. Its flaw is that it omits the content and area of life the behavior applies to.
A behavior with no content gives a teacher nothing concrete to plan
Critical thinking about a science experiment differs from critical thinking about a personal choice. Until the objective names the content and the area of life, the behavior cannot be taught.
How was this article?