Goals and objectives are similar in that they serve to direct teaching and learning. They describe the intended purposes and expected results of teaching activities and establish the foundation for assessment.

Goals are statements about general aims or purposes of education that are broad, long-range intended outcomes. Goals are used primarily in policy making and general program planning.

Objectives are brief, clear statements that describe the desired learning outcomes of instruction. Attention is focused on the specific types of performances that students are expected to demonstrate at the end of instruction.

A) Because the two terms are often used interchangeably, confusion sometimes arises. Although both goals and objectives use the language of outcomes, the characteristic that distinguishes goals from objectives is the level of specificity. Goals express intended outcomes in general terms and objectives express them in specific terms. Goals are written in broad, global, and sometimes vague, language. Objectives are statements that describe the intended results of instruction in terms of specific student behaviors.

A) Objectives are intended results or consequences of instruction, curricula, programs, or activities. Outcomes are achieved results or consequences of what was learned–evidence that some learning took place. Objectives specify what is expected and describe what should be assessed; outcomes are behaviors and products generated by students after instruction and are the objects of assessment.

A) Erwin (1991) states it well, "One must know what is to be assessed before one knows how to assess it" (p. 35). A statement of objectives should, in the best of all possible worlds, precede assessment. Stated in a stronger way, objectives should drive the assessment methods and instruments and not the other way around.

A) Objectives are needed before appropriate assessment tools and procedures can be selected or designed. At a minimum, objectives should describe student behaviors and products that faculty would accept as evidence that the learning outcomes were achieved. Goal statements are helpful, but are sometimes too general, broad, or vague for developing specific assessment tools. Information about how objectives are linked to goals is useful when reporting and using assessment results.

A) Yes, objectives may be classified as cognitive, affective, or skill/performance dimensions. Cognitive objectives are descriptions of thinking skills. Affective objectives refer to attitudinal, personal, and social dimensions of outcomes. Skill objectives such as writing, computer use, speaking, and physical skills are distinctive from cognitive (knowledge) objectives. Skills are the means by which knowledge is acquired. Subject matter objectives are a subset of cognitive objectives that are specific to knowledge of subject matter.

A) Yes, objectives can be classified and written in various styles. The material in this workbook is written with an orientation toward behavioral objectives. However, other styles of objectives are preferred and emphasized within some disciplines. For example, expressive objectives (Eisner, 1985) are commonly used in the visual arts. In contrast to behavioral objectives which are prescriptive, expressive objectives are evocative. Expressive objectives describe educational encounters and are expected to result in diverse student responses.

A) Often they are. However, they may need to be put into written form, revised, or updated. Many instructional decisions are made informally and then communicated orally. Because teaching has dynamic qualities, written objectives may not be available or may need to be updated. Further, as faculty are generally actively engaged in revising their materials and practices, there may be a tendency to write objectives that describe instructional activities rather than student outcomes.

Exercise 1

Getting Started

Before writing or revising departmental goals/objectives,you might try a few of the following.

• Have some open discussion sessions on one of the following topics or something similar.
• Describe the ideal student in your program at various phases throughout your program. Be concrete and focus on those strengths, skills, and values that you feel are the result of, or at least supported and nurtured by, the program experience. Then ask:
• What does this student know?
• What can this student do?
• What does this student care about?
• List and briefly describe the program experiences that contribute most to the development of the ideal student.
• List the achievements you implicitly expect of graduates in each major field?
• Describe your alumni in terms of such achievements as career accomplishments, lifestyles, citizenship activities, and aesthetic and intellectual involvement?
• Collect and review instructional materials. Try sorting materials into 3 broad categories: recognition/recall, comprehension/simple application, critical thinking/problem-solving. Use any of the following:
• syllabi and course outlines
• course assignments and tests
• textbooks (especially the tables of contents, introductions, and summaries)
• Collect and review documents that describe your department and its programs:
• brochures and catalogue descriptions
• accreditation reports
• curriculum committee reports
• mission statements
• Review and react to goals and objectives from another unit that is similar but external (ex. another department or college in the Mid-American Conference). Try grouping the statements into broad categories of student outcomes (i.e., knowledge, attitudinal, behavioral).
• Use the 25 percent problem to refine or reduce a set of goal statements. Imagine that you want to reduce program or course material by 25 percent. What goals would you keep and which would you discard?
• Administer a goals inventory or conduct an interview study. Involve a variety of groups (or "stakeholders") when possible.
• Use a Delphi technique or a modification. This involves administering a series of related questionnaires in which information from the initial form is provided so that respondents can use it to revise their responses on subsequent forms. The objective is to develop consensus before writing goals or objectives.

Mastery objectives are typically concerned with the minimum performance essentials–those learning tasks that must be mastered by all students for success at the next level of instruction. These objectives tend to be limited enough in scope that all, or nearly all, intended outcomes can be specified.

Developmental objectives are concerned with more complex learning outcomes–those learning tasks toward which students can be expected to show varying degrees of progress. Developmental objectives are often written in a two-step process in which a general objective is stated along with a sample of specific learning outcomes.

Essential components

Optional components

Exercise 2

Exercise 3

The Objective. . .

Gronlund (1981) provided the following list of types of outcomes. The list delineates many of the major areas in which instructional objectives might be produced. The specific categories were intended to be suggestive, not exclusive.

Knowledge

• terminology
• specific facts
• concepts and principles
• methods and procedures

Understanding

• concepts and principles
• methods and procedures
• written material, graphs, maps, and numerical data
• problem situations

Application

• factual information
• concepts and principles
• methods and procedures
• problem-solving skills

Thinking skills

• critical thinking
• scientific thinking

General skills

• laboratory skills
• performance skills
• communications skills
• computational skills
• social skills

Attitudes

• social attitudes
• scientific attitudes

Interests

• personal interests
• educational interests
• vocational interests

Appreciation

• literature, art, and music
• social and scientific achievements

Adjustments

• social adjustments
• emotional adjustments

Bloom’s classification of cognitive skills is widely used in instruction planning. The six levels are arranged by level of complexity. Use of this or other classification systems is recommended to safeguard against a tendency to focus on content coverage and to ignore what the students should learn to do with content.

For Further Reading

Bloom, B. S. (Ed.) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: THe Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Doman. White Plains, NY: Longman, 1956.

Eisner, E. W. The Art of Educational Evaluation: A Personal View. Philadelphia, PA: The Falmer Press, 1985.

Erwin, T. D. Assessing Student Learning and Development. Chapter 3. "Establishing Objectives for Outcomes Assessment," pp. 35-51. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc. Pub., 1991.

Gardiner, L. F. Planning for Assessment–Mission Statements, Goals, and Objectives: A Guide for Colleges and Universities. Trenton, NJ: Office of Learning Assessment, New Jersey Department of Higher Education, 1989.

Gronlund, N. E. Stating Objectives for Classroom Instruction. 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan, 1978.

Gronlund, N. E. Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching. 4th ed. New York: Macmillan, 1981.

Lenning, O. T. Previous Attempts to Structure Educational Outcomes and Outcome-Related Concepts: A Compilation and Review of the Literature. Boulder, CO: National Center for Higher Education Management Systems, 1977.