Dr. V.K.Maheshwari, M.A(Socio, Phil) B.Se. M. Ed, Ph.D
Former Principal, K.L.D.A.V.(P.G) College, Roorkee, India
An objective is an goal or end point of something towards which actions are directed. Objectives generally indicate the end points of a journey. They specify where you want to be or what you intend to achieve at the end of a process. An educational objective is that achievement which a specific educational instruction is expected to make or accomplish. It is the outcome of any educational instruction. It is the purpose for which any particular educational undertaking is carried out.
Instructional objectives are those the student should attain upon completion of a segment of instruction. In theory, objectives can vary in scope and character. Instructional procedures ,describe the teaching process; most decisions a teacher makes are on these procedures. Proper management of this component results in those changes I student behavior which we call learning or achievement. Procedures must vary with the instructional objectives.
One way to define instructional objectives is to identify the end-product of instruction in terms of observable performance. The way to determine whether or not a student has learned something is to observe the outcome of his behavior. These outcomes have been conventionally referred to as behavioral objectives. It is more precise to refer to these end products of instruction as terminal performances.
The second set of objectives are non-behavioral statements instructional objectives, where the terminal performances are not specified, because the performance implied are interior states, responses, and processes not open to observation.
The distinction between behavioral and non-behavioral statements lies chiefly in the choice of verb. The verbs in the behavioral statements were to name, to distinguish, and to list. These are publicly observable acts. In the non-behavioral statements the verbs are to understand, to appreciate and to grasp the significance of. These do not indicate how the student will visibly show his understanding and appreciation. Also, much of his understanding and appreciation is neural and cerebral activity which is hardly open to observation by the teacher.
Merits of Behavioral Objectives
Ralph Tyler and Robert Gagne provide three persuasive reasons for the careful definition of instructional objectives. First, such a definition provides guidance in the planning of instruction. If you are not certain where you are going, you may very well end up someplace else. Thus, the teacher must determine at the start what the student will be able to do at the finish. A careful statement of this terminal performance enables the teacher to plan the steps the student must take to achieve it . The teacher can provide for all the responses t he student must take to achieve it. The teacher can provide for all the responses only after he has adequately described the characteristics of these final responses. You may recall that in the pre-tutorial phase of the computer-based teaching model the search for the appropriate program is based on the instructional objectives and the entering behavior of the student. One of the possible outcomes of this search is the modifications of objectives—by changing the amount of time, the expected level of mastery, or the topics covered. These changes can occur only if the objectives first appear in behavioral form. IN the same way, instructional procedures cannot accommodate differences in entering behavior unless the teacher determines in some precise form what the student is able to do before instruction and what he is expected to do after instruction. By far the most important reason for using explicit statements of instructional objective in the guidance they provide the teacher in planning his instructional objectives is the guidance they provide the teacher in planning his instructional procedures.
A second reason for making explicit statements of instrumental objectives is that they are useful in performance assessment. In education, the original concern for adequate statements of objectives came from men chiefly interested in test construction and curriculum evaluation. They discovered that using ambiguous statements of objectives made in difficult or impossible to construct tests and test items. One has much more difficulty constructing test items for objectives which contain the verbs to know and to understand than for those which contain verbs to solve and to differentiate.
A third reason for using explicit statements of objectives pertains more to the student than to the teacher. If the student knows beforehand what he must learn in any given unit of instruction, he can better direct his own attention and efforts. When you contemplate how frequently students are unable to make even an approximate statement of what the teacher is trying to explain the importance of this practice become convincing.
A study of Mager and McCann provides empirical support for the benefits student derives from knowing at the start the specific objectives they should attain. Much learning can occur when the teacher does nothing beyond presenting the student with the list of instructional objectives.
Limitations of Behavioral objectives
One of the first critics of behavioral objectives was Robert Ebel. He argued that instructional objectives pertain to processes as well as products. To limit instructional objectives pertain to products results in an overemphasis on conformity. Ebel writes: “For, if the goals of education are defined in terms of narrowly specific behavior desired by curriculum makers and teachers, what need is there for critical judgment by the student; what freedom is there for creative innovation; what provision is there for adaptive behavior as the cultural world changes? “.
Ebel also argued that there was practical difficulty in the use of behavioral objectives. To try to list all the behavioral objectives for a unit or course requires books rather than statements or paragraphs. Even books ob behavioral objectives would not be able to fully describe all the particular behaviors desired. What is gained in concreteness is lost in complexity.
Elliot Eisner added to the basic criticism of behavioral objectives. In complex subject matters and skills behavioral objectives may be neither possible nor desirable. He believes that in the ‘art and subject matters where novel and creative responses are desired the particular behavior to be developed can not easily be identified. Here curriculum and instruction should yield behaviors and products which are unpredictable. The end achieved ought to be something of a surprise to both teacher and pupil’.
Eisner further argues that there is vast difference between making a quantitative judgment and applying an objective standard. We can make a behavioral judgment of a piece of writing in terms of grammar, syntax, and even logic. But what shapes our preferences for the writings of Truman Capote or Gore Vidal over that of Earnest Hemingway is the result of the aesthetic impact of content and style- a qualitative judgment that varies with individuals and times. It is often the uniqueness of what these writers say and do rather than their conformity to a standard that gives their writings literary and artistic value.
Eisner also differentiated between the psychological and logical study courses. Although it seems logical that a person should know where he is going when he embarks on a trip, it is often often not the most psychologically satisfying way to travel. It is often more exiting to leave some of the itinerary unplanned or to change it when the more interesting alternatives are discovered.
James McDonald believes that our objectives are known to us only after the completion of instruction. Teachers first ask question’ What am I going to do? ‘and out of the doing comes the final accomplishment.
Conclusion
It now appears that not all instructional objectives can or need be defined in behavioral terms. Those that are defined in behavioral terms need not be atomistic and trivial. The most useful level of specificity the teacher describes the concrete behavior he wants the student to acquire. These instructional objectives should express a purpose which is meaningful in the larger context of the life goals of the student, and this purpose should be distinguishable from others.
Not all topics or courses are equally adaptable to behavioral objectives. Moreover age and grade level differences must also be adapted to the substantive behavioral objectives. For example , the behavioral objectives for history courses at the graduate level and at the elementary school level can not be identical because of the differences in course content and ages of the student. B oth substance and age considerations are important in setting the objectives.