You are here

From specific to general: behavioral objectives

26 July, 2019 - 10:10
Available under Creative Commons-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Download for free at http://cnx.org/contents/ce6c5eb6-84d3-4265-9554-84059b75221e@2.1

Compared to the cognitive approach, the behavioral approach to instructional planning reverses the steps in planning. Instead of starting with general goal statements accompanied by indicator examples, it starts with the identification of specific behaviors concrete actions or words that students should perform or display as a result of instruction (Mager, 2005). Collectively, the specific behaviors may describe a more general educational goal, but unlike the indicators used in the cognitive approach, they are not a mere sampling of the possible specific outcomes. Instead they represent all the intended specific outcomes. Consider this sampling of behavioral objectives:

Objectives: Learning to use in-line roller blade skates (beginning level)

  1. Student ties boots on correctly.
  2. Student puts on safety gear correctly, including helmet, knee and elbow pads.
  3. Student skates 15 meters on level ground without falling.
  4. Student stops on demand within a three meter distance, without falling.

The objectives listed are not merely a representative sample of how students can demonstrate success with roller-blading. Instead they are behaviors that every student should acquire in order to meet the goal of using roller blades as a beginner. There simply are no other ways to display learning of this goal; getting 100 per cent on a written test about roller blading, for example, would not qualify as success with this goal, though it might show success at some other goal, such as verbal knowledge about roller blading. Even adding other skating behaviors (like “Student skates backwards” or “Student skates in circles”) might not qualify as success with this particular goal, because it could reasonably be argued that the additional skating behaviors are about skating at an advanced level, not a beginning level.

In the most commonly used version of this approach, originated by Robert Mager (1962, 2005), a good behavioral objective should have three features. First, it should specify a behavior that can in fact be observed. In practice this usually means identifying something that a student does or says, not something a student thinks or feels. Compare the following examples; the one on the left names a behavior to be performed, but the one on the right names a thinking process that cannot, in principle, be seen:

Table 10.4 Example 1

Behavioral objective

Not behavioral object

The student will make a list of animal species that live in the water but breathe air and a separate list of species that live in the water but do not require air to breathe.

The student will understand the difference between fish and mammals that live in the water.

 

The second feature of a good behavioral objective is that it describes conditions of performance of the behavior. What are the special circumstances to be provided when the student performs the objective?

Consider these two examples:

Table 10.5 Example 2

Special condition of performance is specified

A special condition of performance is not specified

Given a list of 50 species, the student will circle those that live in water but breathe air and underline those that live in water but do not breathe air.

After three days of instruction, the student will identify species that live in water but breathe air, as well as species that live in water but do not breathe air.

 

The objective on the left names a special condition of performance that the student will be given a particular kind of list to work from which is not part of the instruction itself. The objective on the right appears to name a condition” three days of instruction”. But the condition really describes what the teacher will do (she will instruct), not something specific to students' performance.

The third feature of a good behavioral objective is that it specifies a minimum level or degree of acceptable performance. Consider these two examples:

Table 10.6 Example 3

Specifies minimum level

Does not specify minimum level

Given a list of 50 species, the student will circle all of those that live in water but breathe air and underline all of those that live in water but do not breathe air. The student will do so within fifteen minutes.

The student will circle names of species that live in water but breathe air and underline those that live in water but do not breathe air.

 

The objective on the left specifies a level of performance -- 100 per cent accuracy within 15 minutes. The objective on the right leaves this information out (and incidentally it also omits the condition of performance mentioned on the left).

Behavioral objectives have obvious advantages because of their clarity and precision. They seem especially well suited for learning that by their nature they can be spelled out explicitly and fully, such as when a student is learning to drive a car, to use safety equipment in a science laboratory, or install and run a particular computer program. Most of these goals, as it happens, also tend to have relatively short learning cycles, meaning that they can be learned as a result of just one lesson or activity, or of just a short series of them at most. Such goals tend not to include the larger, more abstract goals of education. In practice, both kinds of goals -- the general and the specific --  form a large part of education at all grade levels.