|
Entelechy's Newsletter for Trainers, Managers, HR Professionals and Others Responsible for the Performance of Others.
Objectives: Bloom's Taxonomy
Well-written objectives are more than window dressing. Objectives serve several important functions:
-
They provide a guide for instructional designers in designing training. They tell the designer where to go and how far to go (more on this in a bit).
-
They provide a guide to instructor and participant alike. While an agenda may list topics and timeframes, objectives state precisely what the training is going to provide.
-
They serve as the foundation for assessments.
-
They are the target that we all - designers, developers, facilitators, and learners alike - aim for!
Objectives must be precise and meaningful to be effective. Consider the objective: List the steps to log in. This is certainly a precise objective - it's easy to see whether someone can do this task. Is it meaningful? Insofar as the participant may NEVER list the steps on the job (they'll actually log it!), the objective as written may not be meaningful. However, the task of listing the steps to log in may be critical for the participant to master before advancing to an advanced skill - like actually logging on!
|
|
|
People progress through various levels of learning until they master a concept or technique. As training designers, we can choose to stop the progression at any point. As a simple example, sometimes our participants need to DO something (requiring an advanced objective) and sometimes they just need to KNOW something (requiring a less advanced objective).
Benjamin Bloom is the father of objectives. He developed a taxonomy of objectives progressing from very simple to very complex. His taxonomy is useful for writing objectives that are precise and meaningful.
I recently worked with a client on a new hire project. New hire training is notoriously difficult to create simply because you have to assume the newly hired person knows
nothing before they are trained and must know
everything upon completion of the training (okay, that's an exaggeration, but not a big one!).
Therefore, we created a variety of self-paced activities that would expose new hires to a wide range of topics in a meaningful and focused way. Since this is a government agency, the major issue was policy. Policy contains the guidelines by which workers made decisions, interacted with clients, administered benefits, and do their work. Policy can be confusing and seemingly contradictory. New hires know squat about policy! They need to know everything!
The self-paced activities, therefore, were intended to lay the foundation for future learning and application of skills, NOT to be the end training. Once completed with the self-paced activities, the new hire would attend classroom training where the key skills would be refined. Objectives play a BIG part in this handoff!
Here are the levels of learning based on Benjamin Bloom's taxonomy (from simplest to most complex) along with my parenthetical comments regarding the self-paced policy training:
1) The knowledge level involves remembering facts or ideas that are acquired by rote in such a way that the acquired information can later be recognized by the learner. This level is often indicated when the learner has to KNOW something, has to HAVE AN AWARENESS OF something, BE KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT something, or BE FAMILIAR WITH something. (This is what the self-paced policy exposure should be so that new hires can proceed to the next level.)
2) The comprehension level involves not only remembering information but understanding it as well. The learner is expected to come to know the meaning, nature, character, or importance of something. Thus, this level is often indicated when the learner is required to UNDERSTAND something. (Comprehension can come in the self-paced activities with guiding questions. It also can come in the classroom training prereading and class. If policy is only understood when it's translated or verbally explained and discussed, it belongs in the classroom training -- or as precourse reading to the classroom training, not the self-paced training.)
3) The application level involves combining principles, rules, or concepts into meaningful relationships and then applying (using) them in new situations which require some type of solution involving a standard process. When the learners are expected to USE information or skills in a particular situation, the application level is most probably involved. (This is what should be covered in classroom training; participants should be applying what they know.)
4) The analysis level involves breaking a whole into its constituent elements for the purpose of examining the relationship among those elements. When learners are expected to FIGURE OUT what the basic elements of something are and what the relationships among these elements are, then they are performing at the analysis level. (This is what should be covered in classroom training.)
5) The synthesis level involves combining separate elements into a new form that is unique and original because standard solutions do not address the needs in a problem situation. When the learner is expected to MAKE or CREATE something new, the synthesis level is involved. (This may be covered in classroom training but is most likely something that's acquired on the job.)
6) The evaluation level involves making and justifying judgments according to some internal or external criteria. When the learner is expected to CHOOSE, or to JUDGE something, the evaluation level is generally involved. (This may be covered in classroom training but is most likely something that's acquired on the job.)
Bloom's taxonomy implies several things for us as designers:
-
In order for learners to be able to DO something (the highest four levels), they must first KNOW something (the lowest two levels). Thus, we may want to teach and test at the comprehension or knowledge levels just to make sure that learners know what they're supposed to know.
-
There are distinct levels of
knowing. You can know something (e.g., list, match, define, etc.) or you can comprehend something (e.g., explain, describe, outline).
-
There are distinct levels of
doing. You can simply apply the information you've learned all the way up to evaluating the best way to do something based on complex, varying situations. (I personally think Bloom gets a little TOO detailed in the doing objectives!)
-
Write your objectives at the highest level possible, most closely approximating the work that learners will be doing when they have completed your training.
More information about objectives can be found in
Entelechy's Practical Design and Development Tips eGuide, which has been updated to include an appendix on Bloom's Taxonomy. Check out
http://unlockit.com/eguides.htm
for information on this and other eGuides.
Writing Precise and Meaningful Objectives
What's wrong with each of the following objectives?
-
List the steps to log in.
-
Discuss the importance of the underwriting department.
-
List the phone numbers for the District Office.
-
Understand the need to be sensitive to customers' complaints.
-
Be aware of the different types of policies.
Let's look at each of the "objectives" above and rewrite them so they are more precise and meaningful.
-
List the steps to log in. This objective, while specific and instructionally correct, may be written at too low of a performance level. I don't know of any job that requires an employee to "list the steps to log in" as part of their duties! A more appropriate objective may be, "Given a computer, ID, and password, log in to the corporate network."
-
Discuss the importance of the underwriting department. This objective is wrong on two levels. First, it appears that this is a TEACHING objective rather than a LEARNER objective. Objectives should always be written as if they were completing the sentence beginning with, "After completing this course/module, the student should be able to…."
Assuming that this objective WAS learner-oriented (and the learner should be able to
describe the importance of the department), we need to focus the objective. Perhaps we could rewrite the objective as follows:
Describe the three most important functions of the underwriting department. The implication is that we will teach a list of important functions.
-
List the phone numbers for the District Office.
Why would we do this? This is a trivial task and involves simply the memorization of facts. For most jobs, facts (phone numbers, names, acronyms, etc.) can be looked up on a job aid. Write objectives that are meaningful.
-
Understand the need to be sensitive to customers' complaints. While this is a noble attempt, the achievement of this objective can't be determined as written. How do you know when your learner "understands the need to be sensitive?"
Perhaps you can extrapolate by asking the participant to,
Describe the importance of being sensitive to customers'
complaints. While this is a low-level objective, at least it's measurable.
Or maybe you could be a little more ambitious and state,
Given scenarios involving typical customer complaints, respond in ways that demonstrate
sensitivity. The implication is that we teach ways to demonstrate empathy and that some ways are more appropriate than others. (For example, when a customer wishes to cancel their service, we demonstrate sensitivity by using the words, "I'm sorry that we're losing you as a customer; we would demonstrate insensitivity by asking "Why? Are you dissatisfied?") While this is more difficult than asking someone to describe the importance of being sensitive to customers' complaints, I suggest that it's infinitely more appropriate to the learner's job!
-
Be aware of the different types of policies. This presents the same dilemma as the previous objective - there's no way to determine when the learner is aware of the different types of policies. Ask yourself, "What will the learner be able to DO?" Then write the objective.
More information about objectives can be found in
Entelechy's Practical Design and Development Tips eGuide, which has been updated to include an appendix on Bloom's Taxonomy. Check out
http://unlockit.com/eguides.htm
for information on this and other eGuides.
Verbs and Phrases to Avoid When Writing Objectives
The following verbs and phrases represent fuzzy thinking and should be avoided when writing goals or objectives since it is difficult or impossible to demonstrate this behavior. Clarify objectives by asking the question: "What will the learner be able to DO?"
know
understand
comprehend
imagine
conceive
grasp
be aware of
realize
master
learn
handle
remember
think
be familiar with
figure out
appreciate
More information about objectives can be found in Entelechy's Practical Design and Development Tips eGuide, which has been updated to include an appendix on Bloom's Taxonomy. Check out
http://unlockit.com/eguides.htm
for information on this and other eGuides.
|
