Writing objectives

Objectives should be used throughout the design process, as:

an overall objective, defining what the learners must be able to do after completing the learning
enabling objectives, defining the individual sub-tasks that make up the whole

Whichever type of objective you are designing, they need three parts:

a condition, the circumstances under which the performance is done
the performance, that which is done
the criterion, the measure of success.

The objective can then be written as:

Given [insert your condition]
the learner will [insert observable performance]
so that [insert criterion]

What makes a good condition?

The condition describes the circumstances under which the performance must be carried out. Consider repairing a puncture in a bicycle wheel. The conditions for this objective should state the tools available and where it must be done.

For example:

Given a puncture repair outfit and a well-lit shed

Think about how this affects the performance. This condition does not allow the learner to use a bucket of water to find the puncture, and so the task may be much harder. On the other hand, a well-lit shed makes the task easier, but is not necessarily realistic. Not many punctures happen when a bicycle is in a shed!

The test for a good condition is therefore to ask, “Is it realistic?”

The crucial difference between a performance and a learning objective lies in the condition. A performance objective states the conditions under which the actual performance takes place, whereas a learning objective states the conditions under which the learning will be done.

What makes a good performance?

The performance defines what the learner must actually do. The key word here is do, as this part of the objective must be behavioural, i.e., something you can observe.

In our example above the performance part of the objective could be:

repair a puncture

This is observable; you can watch someone repair a puncture.

Contrast this with words such as know, understand, appreciate. You cannot watch anybody knowing, understanding or appreciating. Words such as these must never be used in an objective.

When working in some subject areas, product knowledge training for example, you may find it difficult to see how to avoid using such words. In these instances ask yourself the question "What will the learner do with this knowledge or understanding?"

For example, suppose you are designing some learning for a new piece of legislation. The learner needs to know what some of the clauses say and what implications these have for their job. You can convert the knowing of the legislation into doing by recognising that their knowledge will enable them to show behaviours such as deciding, distinguishing, etc.

The test for a good performance is therefore to ask, “Can I watch someone doing this?”

Bloom's Taxonomy provides a useful reminder for suitable verbs to use:

Type of skill	Actions that demonstrate this skill
Evaluating	Judge, select, decide, critique, justify, verify, debate, assess, recommend
Synthesising	Create, invent, predict, construct, design, imagine, improve, produce, propose
Analysing	Classify, categorise, derive, model
Applying	Calculate, solve, determine, apply
Comprehending	Explain, paraphrase
Knowing	List, state, recite

Bloom also distinguishes between behaviours in three domains:

cognitive, intellectual skills
affective, feelings and emotions
psychomotor, physical movement

Don Clark's Big Dog is an excellent source of further information on this complex topic.

What makes a good criterion?

The criterion should contain two elements (some references to this subject define them separately, implying a four-part objective). These elements are the:

measure of success, which clearly states information such as how high, how many, how quickly
measurement tool, which explains how the measurement will be made, for example by the person carrying out the performance, by a supervisor, etc.

The test for a measure of success is to ask, "Is this appropriate?"

What makes it appropriate? Clearly it must be related to the performance, and it must be set at a level that is neither too high nor too low. Too high may be unachievable and therefore discouraging, whereas too low will not offer any sense of achievement.

Consider the puncture example. Appropriate measures of success could be:

so that the tyre stays inflated for one month, or
so that no bubbles are seen coming from the patch when it is held underwater

Who is involved in design?

Breaking content down