Internet Learning Volume 3, Number 1, Spring 2014 | Page 9

Internet Learning
tives represent a significant portion of the
QM rubric.
The Importance of Learning
Objectives
Robert Mager, likely the foremost
classical authority on learning objectives,
describes a learning objective
as “an intent communicated by a statement
describing a proposed change in a
learner – a statement of what the learner is
to be like when he has successfully completed
a learning experience. It is a description
of a pattern of behavior (performance) we
want the learner to be able to demonstrate”
(1962, p. 2). According to Mager, “When
clearly defined goals are lacking, it is impossible
to evaluate a course or program
efficiently, and there is no sound basis for
selecting appropriate materials, content, or
instructional methods” (p. 2).
Learning objectives, derived from
an appropriate needs analysis, serve as the
underpinning to all well-known instructional
design process models. According
to Dick, Carey, and Carey, learning objectives
“are an integral part of the design
process […] Objectives serve as the input
documentation for the designer or test
construction specialist as they prepare the
test and the instructional strategy” (2009,
pp. 113–114). Furthermore, “objectives are
used to communicate to both the instructor
and learners what may be learned from
the materials” (p. 114). Renowned educational
psychologist Robert Gagné further
elaborates on the importance of informing
learners of the objectives in his classic text,
The Conditions of Learning:
[T]he learner must be informed of the
nature of the achievement expected as an
outcome of learning. […] The purpose of
such a communication to the learner is
to establish an expectancy of the performance
to be achieved as a result of learning.
[…] The primary effect of providing
learners with an expectancy of the learning
outcome is to enable them to match
their own performances with a class of
performance they expect to be “correct”
(Gagné, 1977, p. 291).
Lastly, learning objectives are invaluable
instruments in a climate increasingly
focused on outcomes assessment and
alignment with institutional, regional, and
national standards.
Some, however, have expressed
skepticism or disillusionment with the use
of learning objectives. Rosenberg (2012),
for example, questions the value of presenting
learning objectives to students:
[D]o objectives truly help the learners?
[…] We’ve all been there; sitting in class
while the instructor reads (or we view
online) any number of statements, sometimes
dozens of them, for each lesson or
module, that often begin, “at the conclusion
of this course, the student will be able
to…” Each objective focuses on a specific
skill or knowledge taught in the course,
but may be too much in the weeds to answer
students’ bigger questions like, “Why
am I taking this course?” “What’s in it for
me?” and “How will this help me down
the road?” (para. 5)
Rosenberg offers that learning objectives
don’t offer students a sense of value
in the course, and should be replaced (or
supplemented with) a list of statements of
expectations to “truly broadcast the value
and worthiness of your training efforts”
(para. 10). Rossett (2012) counters Rosenberg
directly: “Marc, you urge us to add
expectations to [learning objectives], ex-
8