Page 94 - Making Instruction Work

chap 7 3/14/97 1:21 PM Page 80

80 making instruction work

seen dozens of honest instructors faced with this ridiculous
task of rewriting the same objective to fit different jurisdic-
tions. And I’ve seen them become frustrated, and then furious,
as well they should.
There are other ways to goof off with objectives. One is to
create a “taxonomy” of performance levels, so that instead of
saying how well a person must perform, the objective simply
says,“Level B3,”or “Criterion level A2.”This looks very precise,
until you look at the definitions of these “levels.”Then you dis-
cover that the criterion is still being kept a secret. Here’s an
example from one of these “criterion taxonomies.” This one is
called TPL-2 (Task Proficiency Level). This is how it is defined:
“Can do most parts of the task. Needs help only on hardest
parts. May not meet local demands for speed or accuracy.”
How well should a student be able to perform a task with this
alleged criterion? You still don’t know.
When you write an instructional objective, you are simply
trying to communicate something about what you want stu-
dents to be able to do when they leave you. That’s all. If you
want them to be able to unscrew a light bulb while rubbing
their tummies, say so and be done with it. Don’t let the bedaz-
zlers drape your objectives with ornaments that are neither
useful nor pretty.
Oh sure, you may find yourself having to conform to some
bureaucratic demand to write your objectives in peculiar ways.
If so, bend a little. Write a clean set that will be useful for your
own instruction, and then rewrite them according to the
“guidelines” you are expected to follow. Send those on up the
line where they will do little harm.

To Learn More: See Resources #5, #11, and #12.